text:
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
BSH Home Appliances Corporation v. Michael Stanley / Michael Sipo
Case No. D2014-1433
1. The Parties
The Complainant is BSH Home Appliances Corporation of New Bern, North Carolina, United States of America ("U.S."), represented by SafeNames Ltd., United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
The Respondents are Michael Stanley of Irvine, California, United States of America; Michael Sipo of Las Vegas, Nevada, United States of America.
2. The Domain Names and Registrars
The disputed domain names <boschappliancepro.info>, <boschapplianceservice.info> <boschpro.info>, <boschservicepro.info>, <boschappliancerepairs.info>, <boschtech.info>, <gaggenaupro.info>, <gaggenauservice.info>, <gaggenauservicepro.info>, <gaggenauservicetech.info>, <gaggenautech.info>, <gaggenauappliancerepairs.info>, <thermadorservice.info>, <thermadorpro.info>, <thermadorservicepro.info>, <thermadorservicetech.info>, <thermadortech.info> and <thermadortechnician.info> are registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC.
The disputed domain names <boschapplianceserviceflorida.info>, <sandiegoboschappliancerepair.info>, <gaggenauappliancerepairflorida.info>, <sandiegogaggenauappliancerepair.info>, <sandiegothermadorappliancerepair.info>, <thermadorappliancerepairflorida.info> are registered with Wild West Domains, LLC.
3. Procedural History
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on August 21, 2014. On August 21, 2014, the Center transmitted by email to GoDaddy.com, LLC and Wild West Domains, LLC (the "Registrars") a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain names. On August 22, 2014, the Registrars transmitted by email to the Center their verification response confirming that the Respondents are listed as the registrants and providing the contact details.
On September 2, 2014, the Respondent Michael Stanley submitted a Response to the Complaint prior to the commencement of the administrative proceeding.
In response to a notification by the Center that the Complaint was administratively deficient, the Complainant filed an amended Complaint on September 5, 2014.
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy" or "UDRP"), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules"), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Supplemental Rules").
In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondents of the Complaint, and the proceeding commenced on September 8, 2014. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was September 28, 2014.
The Respondent Michael Stanley filed a second Response with the Center on September 21, 2014. The Panel will treat this document as the operative Response.
The Center appointed Richard G. Lyon as the sole panelist in this matter on September 26, 2014. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted and has jurisdiction to decide this administrative proceeding. The Panel has submitted his Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.
On September 23, 2014, the Complainant submitted a supplemental filing. On September 24, 2014, by email communication to the Center, the Respondent Michael Stanley objected to this filing, and on that date the Center advised the Complainant that the admissibility of the supplemental filing would be referred to the Panel upon appointment. By order dated September 29, 2014, the Panel denied leave to submit the supplemental filing.
4. Factual Background
The facts necessary to decide this proceeding are undisputed.
The Complainant and its affiliated companies manufacture and sell home appliances around the world. Three of the Complainant's brands are Bosch, Thermador, and Gaggenau, each used for a variety of home appliances. The Complainant's parent company holds registered trademarks in various countries that incorporate each of these brand names. Its first U.S. trademark registered with the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) for BOSCH was registered in 1991, for THERMADOR in 1980, for GAGGENAU in 1981. Each of the three brands is well known in the United States.
Since 2011 the Respondents operate a business providing aftermarket service on "all brands of home appliances made and sold in the world, including Complainant['s]", undertaken through "the dispatching of service technicians for appliance brands". The Respondents registered the disputed domain names at various times between July 2011 and January 2014.
One or two of the disputed domain names yielded an error message when recently accessed by the Panel. All the others resolved to pages at which the Respondents offer their repair services on appliances bearing the brand name incorporated into the particular disputed domain name. Five include the following statement; "We are independent highly trained and experienced [brand] appliance repair specialists not affiliated with BSH/Bosch appliance manufacturer. If your appliance under warranty contact [sic] the manufacturer, we only work on out of warranty appliance. [Brand] logo trademark of BSH/Bosch appliance manufacturer." The others do not, stating instead "Factory Trained and Experienced [brand] Appliance Repair Specialist." The entity providing services is identified as BoschPro, Boschtech, Gaggenautech, Thermadortech, Thermador Xpress,ThermadorPro, ThermadorService Pro, ThermadorService Tech or ThermadorTechnician, with the name corresponding to the brand incorporated into the particular domain name. Eight websites include a link entitled "Consumer Complaints about [applicable brand]" that resolves to an informational page with quotations from dissatisfied customers, reference to a United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) proceeding against the Complainant, and urging a consumer to contact the FTC "If your [applicable brand] appliances developed life threatening malfunction."
The Complainant has never authorized the Respondents to use its trademarks and has never authorized the Respondent to perform services on its products.
The Complainant sent the Respondents cease-and-desist letters in 2012 and 2014, but the parties have not been able to resolve the matter.
5. Parties' Contentions
A. Complainant
The Complainant contends as follows:
1. The Complainant has rights in its BOSCH, GAGGENAU, and THERMADOR marks by reason of its USPTO-registered trademarks. Each disputed domain name is identical to one of these marks or confusingly similar; addition of common or descriptive words to a well-known mark does not obviate confusion.
2. The Complainant has not authorized the Respondents to use its marks and neither Respondent is commonly known by any of the marks. The Respondents' use of the disputed domain names is not bona fide because such use and website content at the disputed domain names implies affiliation with or authorization by the Complainant; and the disputed domain names were chosen to take advantage of the goodwill attached to the Complainant's marks. Any association of the Respondents with Complainant's brand names has arisen through their unauthorized appropriation of the Complainant's marks and as such does not confer a right or legitimate interest and thus precludes any defense of "commonly known as" under Policy, paragraph 4(c)(i).
3. "The Respondent[s'] motivation is to tarnish the Complainant's mark" by gathering consumer complaints, publishing some on their websites, and otherwise denigrating the Complainant's products and services on their websites. This results in "provid[ing] a false impression of the Complainant's brands which has received incalculable amounts of positive reviews over the years." The Respondent has registered over 200 domain names, most of which incorporate well-known brands. "The sheer amount of registrations spanned over multiple brands can only be for the purpose of pushing the targeted brand out of the area in which it operates. By registering multiple domain names, Respondent is clearly attempting to increase his chance of being found in search engines and consequently catching traffic that he is not entitled to."
B. Respondent
The Respondents contest the Complainant's charges under each element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
1. The Complainant holds no United States trademarks; all the ones at issue here are held by the Complainant's German parent company. The Complainant's marks do not extend to the services performed by the Respondents. The Complainant does not itself perform service on its products in the U.S., instead using third parties such as the Respondents. No confusion "ever may be construed by [Respondents'] use of generic words such as Bosch, Gaggenau or Thermador which inherently refers to the makers of such appliance, are having well known relation to the manufacturer among the public that confusion is impossible. The gap between the mark and the term Appliance Repair, Appliance Serviceman, Technician, Pro or Tech is amply descriptive and wide." The Complainant has not shown proof of even a single instance of actual confusion.
2. The Respondents are making nominative fair use of the Complainant's marks and have a right so to do under U.S. law. "[A]s technician providing and promoting service on Complainant manufactured brands and as tradesman that buy genuine factory parts from Complainant factory, Respondent is entitled under the U.S. Fair Use Clause to claim publicly his expertise of the brand and that parts used are genuine Bosch, Gaggenau and Thermador parts without needing any authorization from mark registrant." Any adverse commentary about the Complainant is true and legitimate. The Respondents' services, all rendered by highly qualified technicians and using genuine Bosch parts, "add value to Complainant brand and marks".
3. The Respondents have never tried to sell any of the disputed domain names; all have been used for fair use informative purposes and accurately to describe the Respondents' business. At no time did the Respondents intend to tarnish the Complainant or its marks. The parties are not competitors. All criticism is accurate and provided to educate consumers. The Complainant has taken no action for four years. The Complainant has acquiesced in the Respondent's use of the disputed domain names; many third parties use domain names incorporating the Complainant's brands. The Respondents' domain name portfolio includes many names not related to appliance repair and the others bear on brands other than those of the Complainant.
The Complaint is part of a campaign of harassment against the Respondents, which the Respondents characterize as "a robbery on Respondent, attempting to steal Respondent goodwill and online business that was established four years ago."
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Procedural Matters
1. Complainant's Supplemental Filing
The Panel's September 27, 2014 order stated the basis for denying Complainant's Supplemental Filing: "The Panel denies leave to file this document on the grounds, now a Consensus View in the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Second Edition ("WIPO Overview 2.0"), paragraph 4.2, that the filing contains no matter that the Complainant could not reasonably have anticipated prior to the filing of the Complaint and no factual matter arising subsequently to the filing of the Complaint. In the words of the three-member panel in The Teaching Company, LLC d/b/a The Great Courses v. Worldwide Media Inc, WIPO Case No. D2014-0457, the Complainant's Supplemental Filing consists of nothing more than 'standard reply brief stuff' and therefore is not allowed under a standard that permits unsolicited supplemental pleadings only under 'exceptional circumstances'".
2. Consolidation
Sixteen of the disputed domain names are owned by Respondent Michael Stanley, the remaining eight by Respondent Michael Sipo. On his own initiative the Panel considers whether it is appropriate to consider all disputed domain names in a single proceeding. Primarily because the Respondents make no objection, but also because the same reasoning applies to all the disputed domain names and consolidation will allow all matters between the Complainant and these Respondents to be resolved in one proceeding, the Panel will consider this case as a single proceeding. The Panel finds that "consolidation would be fair and equitable to all parties." WIPO Overview 2.0, paragraph 4.16.1
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Respondents raise a preliminary issue about this Complainant's right to invoke the Policy when its German parent holds the trademarks upon which the Complaint is based. While it is clear that not only a mark owner may have sufficient rights in a mark to maintain a Policy proceeding, little case law focuses on the issue presented here: whether a wholly-owned subsidiary may do so when the parent holds the trademarks. The limited precedent that exists indicates that it may, either under a theory of implied license, see DigiPoll Ltd. v. Raj Kumar, WIPO Case No. D2004-0939, or a more general notion based on corporate control and common sense. As stated in Grupo Televisa, S.A., Televisa, S.A. de C.V., Estrategia Televisa, S.A. de C.V., Videoserpel, Ltd. v. Party Night Inc., a/k/a Peter Carrington, WIPO Case No. D2003-0796, "It has been accepted in several decisions that a company related as subsidiary or parent to the registered holder of a mark may be considered to have rights in the mark. See for example Miele, Inc. v. Absolute Air Cleaners and Purifiers, WIPO Case No. D2000-0756where Complainant's grand-parent corporation had a long established U.S. trademark registration for the mark for vacuum cleaners."
This Panel will follow that approach and allow the Complainant, the mark owner's wholly-owned subsidiary, to maintain this proceeding. This is not a case where there exists an obvious impediment to the mark owner's bringing the Complaint directly, and nothing in the record suggests any advantage sought or gained by having the subsidiary rather than the parent file the Complaint.
With that standing objection overruled, the Panel easily finds confusing similarity between the Complainant's marks and the disputed domain names. "The first element of the UDRP serves essentially as a standing requirement. The threshold test for confusing similarity under the UDRP involves a comparison between the trademark and the domain name itself to determine likelihood of Internet user confusion." WIPO Overview 2.0, paragraph 2.1. Applying that test and longstanding Policy precedent, confusion is obvious. The marks at issue are distinctive, not everyday words (and not "generic" as the Respondents assert). The dominant feature of each disputed domain name is one of the Complainant's marks, and the surrounding words indicate either a geographic area or the services the Respondents provide. That suffices for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(i). Proof of actual confusion is not necessary.
Most of the Respondents' arguments on this Policy head are better placed in an infringement action. They may also bear on the Complainant's burden of proof under paragraphs 4(a)(ii) and 4(a)(iii).
C. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant has made its prima facie case that the Respondents lack rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names by demonstrating without contradiction that the Complainant has never authorized the Respondents to use its marks and that the Respondents have not been commonly known by the disputed domain names. The Complainant correctly asserts that a domain name owner cannot create a "commonly known as" defense (see Policy, paragraph 4(c)(i)) simply by doing business under a name registered without authority. By the Respondents' own admission the disputed domain names are not used to promote a business that operates independently of the disputed domain names.
The burden of production thus shifts to the Respondents to provide proof of a right or legitimate interest, with the ultimate burden of persuasion remaining with the Complainant. WIPO Overview 2.0, paragraph 2.1. The Panel addresses each of the Respondents' arguments in turn.
1. Criticism
Though not directly asserted, the Respondents imply a right freely to criticize the Complainant in order "to educate consumers about the repair of particular problem and likely costs or repairs." Even if this assertion be true the safe harbor of paragraph 4(c)(iii) of the Policy is not available to the Respondents. The Respondents' websites at the disputed domain names are unabashedly commercial, and the safe harbor applies only to sites that practice only criticism, without a commercial purpose. WIPO Overview 2.0, paragraph 2.4.
2. Fair use
Some UDRP panels have found nominative fair use, based upon U.S. law, to demonstrate a right or legitimate interest when the trademark is used in the domain name. "[T]he referential use of another's trademark is permissible where (1) the trademark owner's product or service cannot be readily identified without using the mark, (2) the mark is used only so much as is necessary for such identification, and (3) such use does not suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the mark owner." Project Management Institute v. CMN.com, WIPO Case No. D2013-2035, citing two cases from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, New Kids on the Block v. News American Publishing, Inc., 971 F.2d 302 (1992) and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. Tabari,.610 F.3d 1171 (2010). The Panel refers to these requirements as the "Toyota test."
The first question on this subject should be whether or to what extent the Toyota test's second requirement for showing nominative fair use allows reference to the mark in the disputed domain name. A persuasive line of decisions implies that unadorned use of the mark by itself in a domain name is not permissible under the Policy.2 So do both common sense and the purpose of the Policy,3 which is to address abusive registration of domain names that are intended to mislead Internet users. Some use of the Complainant's marks may be necessary accurately to describe the Respondents' services, and the Respondents are correct in asserting that some limited use may be legitimate. But limited "referential" use, in text on a website, is one thing. Making the mark the dominant feature of a web address, the first thing an Internet user sees and the means of attracting Internet users, is quite another. As many UDRP decisions concerning resellers, discussed at greater length in the following section, make clear, use of another's mark in a domain name generally requires some form of authorization, express or implied, that ordinarily includes conditions and limitations. As this Panel stated in Malwarebytes, Corp. v. Charlie Jones, WIPO Case No. D2014-0226, it is more a question of contract law than infringement. While not ruling out the possibility that inclusion of a mark together with a descriptive term in a domain name may in some circumstances be nominative fair use,4 this Panel is skeptical about such use being "only so much as is necessary for . . . identification" (emphasis supplied).
On the circumstances of this case, the Panel finds that the Respondents' use of the Complainant's mark is not bona fide. Use of the Complainant's marks in the disputed domain names is not in the Panel's view "only so much as is necessary for" proper identification; further, even if it were, the Respondent's websites falsely imply the Complainant's sponsorship or endorsement. Failure to include a disclaimer on most of the sites, use of the Complainant's marks in the same type font and style as the Complainant does and with photographs of the Complainant's products, including the Complainant's logo, and in general mimicking the entire look and feel of the Complainant's advertising are conclusive evidence that the Respondents' actions are not bona fide, and that the Respondents have not met either the second or third criterion under the Toyota test for nominative fair use.
3. Reseller's Right to Use Manufacturer's Name
Authorized resellers are allowed some use of their manufacturer's mark under certain conditions. This has reached the point of a Consensus View in the WIPO Overview 2.0, paragraph 2.3:
"Consensus view: Normally, a reseller or distributor can be making a bona fide offering of goods and services and thus have a legitimate interest in the domain name if its use meets certain requirements. These requirements normally include the actual offering of goods and services at issue, the use of the site to sell only the trademarked goods, and the site's accurately and prominently disclosing the registrant's relationship with the trademark holder. The respondent must also not try to 'corner the market' in domain names that reflect the trademark."
These conditions derive from the early case of Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ASD, Inc., WIPO Case No. D2001-0903, and will be referred to as the "Oki Data test."
Two preliminary hurdles arguably render the Oki Data test inapplicable to this case. First, the Respondents, as independent service providers, are not strictly a reseller, and by definition their services do not come from the manufacturer. This is not merely a semantic distinction; one criterion for determining an authorized reseller's right to use its manufacturer's mark in a domain name without express permission includes the sale of genuine goods. Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ASD, Inc., supra.
Second, the Oki Data test comes from a case in which the Respondent was an authorized reseller, which the Respondents admittedly are not. Some panels however have extended the test's reach to unauthorized resellers as well. WIPO Overview 2.0, paragraph 2.3. While this Panel has cautioned against automatic application to unauthorized resellers, some of the criteria that led him to apply the Oki Data test in an aftermarket case, see General Motors LLC v. Flashcraft, Inc DBA Cad Company, WIPO Case No. D2011-2117,5 are present here. As the Respondents note, third party service on home appliances is common in the United States and regularly considered procompetitive by the antitrust authorities and the courts. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. Tabari, supra. The appliance repair industry is regulated lightly if at all. The Respondents claim to provide service that the mark owner Complainant does not.
The Panel need not decide if the Respondents have cleared these preliminary hurdles, however, for an examination of their websites demonstrates that they do not meet the Oki Data test. As noted in the Panel's discussion of nominative fair use (section 6-C.2 above), these websites, even the few with disclaimers, do not "accurately and prominently" indicate the Respondents' independent status; rather, they give a false impression of endorsement. Further, by registering twenty-four domain names the Respondents approach the "cornering the market" prohibition in the Oki Data test. There is no basis under the Oki Data line of cases to imply authority to use the Complainant's marks in the disputed domain names.
The Respondents' reference to the antitrust laws and the allowance of entities not affiliated with manufacturers to provide aftermarket service misses the point of this proceeding. The issue is not the "the legitimacy of the Respondent's business. The issue for the Panel to determine under this Policy head is whether the Respondent's use of the Complainant's mark in the disputed domain name is bona fide or legitimate." General Motors LLC v. Flashcraft, Inc DBA Cad Company, supra. The availability of independent (third party) servicing of products almost always is procompetitive and thus beneficial to consumers. Whether the Respondents' business illustrates this is a question beyond the jurisdiction of a UDRP panel and not relevant to this proceeding.
5. Promoting the Complainant's Brands
The Respondents' assertion that their providing quality service in a country where the Complainant provides no service "add[s] value to Complainant brand and marks" is another issue beyond the limited brief of a UDRP panel. It may be pertinent to the Complainant's charge of tarnishment, which in the following section the Panel finds unproven. This Panel has no way to judge the quality of the Respondents' services or their impact on the goodwill attaching to the Complainant's marks. The Panel notes that such assessments are normally the exclusive province of the mark owner.
6. Laches
The Respondents claim a defense based upon non-action by the Complainant for "more than four years."6 As recently noted in Gamberoso Rosso Holding S.p.A. v. CDN Properties Incorporated, WIPO Case No. D2014-1349, "The non-applicability of the defense of laches (i.e., undue delay) itself in UDRP proceedings has long been recognized by UDRP panels, over many years and a large body of jurisprudence." See also WIPO Overview 2.0, paragraph 4.10, and cases there cited. Nothing in this case provides any reason to depart from this well-settled precedent.
The fact that other third parties may be using domain names that incorporate the Complainant's marks provides the Respondents no assistance. It may be that the other users are duly licensed. Which infringers or cybersquatters to proceed against is another exclusive prerogative of the mark owner. While sometimes relevant in defending a trademark infringement action, selective or targeted enforcement of rights does not furnish a defense in a Policy proceeding.
The Complainant has therefore proven that the Respondents lack rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names.
D. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Complainant's principal argument under this Policy head is to this Panel's thinking pure speculation. The Complainant's assertion of tarnishment as the Respondents' motive is not established by the evidence in the record. The only item offered in support is the Respondents' acknowledged collection of government action and consumer complaints about the Complainant's products and including some of them on their websites. To find that the Complainant's marks were tarnished as a result or that this was the Respondents' intention in posting the criticism would require the Panel at a minimum to evaluate the truth or falsity of the postings, something he deems impossible without extensive discovery and testimony, before even considering whether the Respondents' statements or postings might be protected as free speech. And then the Panel would need somehow to find that this was the Respondents' motivation, a substantial logical leap that defies common sense. Why wouldn't an independent servicer point out the relative shortcomings of a manufacturer's own service? On the record in this case the tarnishment claim fails.
The Respondents' admitted conduct does however fall squarely within two of the examples of evidence of bad faith set out in paragraph 4(b) of the Policy. Having registered more than twenty domain names (more than fifty at one time, if the Complainant's unsupported allegation is to be believed) qualifies as a "pattern of… conduct" under paragraph 4(b)(ii), which provides as an example of bad faith that "you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct." In addition to the Complainant's marks, the Respondent has registered several dozen other domain names that similarly include as their dominant feature the brand of at least eight other appliance manufacturers.
On a more fundamental level, incorporating the Complainant's marks as the dominant features of the disputed domain names is a textbook example of "by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location." Policy, paragraph 4(b)(iv). The effect of the Respondents' use of the Complainant's marks, and very likely the Respondents' intent, was to attract Internet users to the Respondents' business by using the Complainant's marks, implying the Complainant's endorsement or sponsorship. The look-alike websites and general failure plainly and simply (or in the words of the WIPO Overview 2.0, "accurately and prominently") to explain the Respondents' independent status reinforce this conclusion. This demonstrates use in bad faith.
The text of the disputed domain names themselves establishes the Respondents' knowledge of the Complainant and its marks at registration, and the Panel has found that the Respondents chose the names to target the Complainant.
The Complainant has carried its evidentiary burden under this Policy head.
7. Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain names:
<boschappliancepro.info>, <boschapplianceservice.info>, <boschpro.info>, <boschservicepro.info>, <boschappliancerepairs.info>, <boschtech.info> <gaggenaupro.info>, <gaggenauservice.info>, <gaggenauservicepro.info>, <gaggenauservicetech.info>, <gaggenautech.info>, <gaggenauappliancerepairs.info>, <thermadorservice.info>, <thermadorpro.info>, <thermadorservicepro.info>, <thermadorservicetech.info>, <thermadortech.info>, <thermadortechnician.info>, <boschapplianceserviceflorida.info>, <sandiegoboschappliancerepair.info>, <gaggenauappliancerepairflorida.info>, <sandiegogaggenauappliancerepair.info>, <sandiegothermadorappliancerepair.info>, and <thermadorappliancerepairflorida.info>
be transferred to the Complainant.
Richard G. Lyon
Sole Panelist
1 The Response uses the singular "Respondent" throughout, suggesting that the two named Respondents are one person or that one Respondent acquired the other's domain names. In the Panel's opinion either circumstance has no impact on his decision.
2 See, e.g., NVIDIA Corporation v. Giovanni Laporta, Yoyo.email Ltd., WIPO Case No. D2014-0770, Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc., Sheraton LLC, Sheraton International IP, LLC v. Giovanni Laporta / yoyo.email, WIPO Case No. D2014-0686 (<sheraton.email> and <sheraton.parklane.email>, Statoil ASA v. Giovanni Laporta, Yoyo.Email Ltd., WIPO Case No. D2014-0637 (<statoil.email>, "the Statoil case"), and Mejeriforeningen Danish Dairy Board v. Domain Manager, Yoyo.email, WIPO Case No. D2014-0730.
3 Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. Tabari, supra, indicates the contrary, at least where the mark is adorned by descriptive terms in a Lanham Act action. The Panel chooses not to extend the discussion because as explained in the following paragraph of text the content of the Respondents' websites falsely implies the Complainant's endorsement.
4 A domain name that itself indicated no connection with the mark owner – for example, <IndependentBoschService.com> - might qualify under the Toyota test. That scenario awaits another panel in another case.
5 The Flashcraft case also involved aftermarket services, not a resale of genuine goods.
6 The "four years" apparently refers to the existence of the Respondents' business, as the first disputed domain name to be registered was acquired in 2011. The claim of four years is undercut considerably by the Respondents' acknowledgment of a cease-and-desist letter in 2012.


Hello, when I turn on Web Sharing on my iPad and input/access the URL on my Mac browser, the page does not load and says connection has timed out. How to get Web Sharing to work?
Migrate Baiboard2 to Baiboard3 should work according FAQ. But is does not. Get an Internal Sever Error.
How do you close a meet? If I delete it from my iPad students still have access.
If I start a meet for work with students I want to be able to end the meet. I can delete the meet from my iPad bu the students still have access. How to I stop/cancel the meet.
If you have a "mentions" page somewhere - we will be pleased to get a link to this post.
How do I exit a board to return to my home screen where all my boards are?
I believe that this might be on the 1.1 road map but key commands for the main tools would be great. After many years of hitting z for zoom and v for pointer and b for brush, those options are muscle memory.
In the heat of giving a live whiteboard session I know I reach for those out of habit. Please delete this if you've already made plans for this.
How is the Voice conference supposed to work?
How is the Voice conference supposed to work? I met up with another ipad and was sable to communicate via chat and voice recordings. The white board was working well. But clicking the phone icon resulted in nothing. There was a menu that popped up with "calling"
Could we copy/duplicate an entire board and save it as a new board?
I agree recording option would be great.
Thanks for your feedback. It's on our road map, and will be supported in the 2.0 version.


The Painted Caravan has found the perfect home at Market Square Records. Launched in 1999 from an 18th century building overlooking the bustling square of the historic market town of Winslow in central England, Market Square has flourished even where other independent labels have sadly foundered in the face of challenging market conditions. In fact, the label has steadily expanded its repertoire with a giddy mix of genres, spanning folk, rock, prog, pop and psych, jazz fusion and hard rock/metal, featuring a unique stable of artists including Sonja Kristina, Kevin Ayers, Bert Jansch, Neil Ardley, Steve Ashley, Lindisfarne, Linda Lewis, Michael Chapman and Eleanor McEvoy among others. There's more on Market Square Records at www.marketsquarerecords.com and on the company's music business activities at www.marketsquaremusic.com.


text:
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8' standalone='no'?>
<doxygen xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="compound.xsd" version="1.8.6">
  <compounddef id="get__max__size_8hpp" kind="file">
    <compoundname>get_max_size.hpp</compoundname>
    <includes local="no">cstddef</includes>
    <includes refid="access_8hpp" local="no">boost/geometry/core/access.hpp</includes>
    <includes refid="math_8hpp" local="no">boost/geometry/util/math.hpp</includes>
    <incdepgraph>
      <node id="23159">
        boost/geometry/util/math.hpp
        <link refid="math_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23160" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23161" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23142" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23162" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23163" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23164" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23165" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23158" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23166" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23169" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23149">
        boost/type_traits/remove_const.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23161">
        limits
      </node>
      <node id="23162">
        boost/math/constants/constants.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23152">
        boost/type_traits/is_const.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23141">
        boost/geometry/core/access.hpp
        <link refid="access_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23140" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23142" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23143" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23144" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23145" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23146" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23147" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23154" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23156" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23160">
        cmath
      </node>
      <node id="23151">
        boost/mpl/if.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23144">
        boost/type_traits/is_pointer.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23163">
        boost/math/special_functions/fpclassify.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23146">
        boost/geometry/core/coordinate_type.hpp
        <link refid="coordinate__type_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23143" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23147" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23154" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23156" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23157" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23143">
        boost/mpl/assert.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23153">
        boost/type_traits/remove_reference.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23168">
        boost/geometry/core/coordinate_system.hpp
        <link refid="coordinate__system_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23143" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23147" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23156" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23142">
        boost/core/ignore_unused.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23157">
        boost/geometry/util/promote_floating_point.hpp
        <link refid="promote__floating__point_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23151" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23158" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23155">
        boost/geometry/core/tags.hpp
        <link refid="core_2tags_8hpp"/>
      </node>
      <node id="23167">
        boost/type_traits/integral_constant.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23165">
        boost/type_traits/is_fundamental.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23147">
        boost/geometry/core/point_type.hpp
        <link refid="point__type_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23143" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23148" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23149" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23150" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23154" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23155" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23156" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23148">
        boost/range/value_type.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23140">
        cstddef
      </node>
      <node id="23150">
        boost/geometry/core/ring_type.hpp
        <link refid="ring__type_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23143" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23151" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23148" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23152" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23149" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23153" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23154" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23155" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23158">
        boost/type_traits/is_integral.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23170">
        boost/type_traits/is_floating_point.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23154">
        boost/geometry/core/tag.hpp
        <link refid="tag_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23155" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23156" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23166">
        boost/geometry/core/cs.hpp
        <link refid="cs_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23140" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23143" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23167" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23168" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23155" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23156">
        boost/geometry/util/bare_type.hpp
        <link refid="bare__type_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23149" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23145" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23153" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23139">
        /home/travis/build/boostorg/boost/boost/geometry/algorithms/detail/get_max_size.hpp
        <link refid="get_max_size.hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23140" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23141" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23159" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23145">
        boost/type_traits/remove_pointer.hpp
      </node>
      <node id="23169">
        boost/geometry/util/select_most_precise.hpp
        <link refid="select__most__precise_8hpp"/>
        <childnode refid="23151" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23170" relation="include">
        </childnode>
        <childnode refid="23165" relation="include">
        </childnode>
      </node>
      <node id="23164">
        boost/numeric/conversion/cast.hpp
      </node>
    </incdepgraph>
    <innernamespace refid="namespaceboost">boost</innernamespace>
    <innernamespace refid="namespaceboost_1_1geometry">boost::geometry</innernamespace>
    <briefdescription>
    </briefdescription>
    <detaileddescription>
    </detaileddescription>
    <location file="/home/travis/build/boostorg/boost/boost/geometry/algorithms/detail/get_max_size.hpp"/>
  </compounddef>
</doxygen>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Golden Contract: The quarter-finals sees Bob Ajisafe and Hosea Burton collide
There were some surprise match-ups that have blown things wide open as the #GoldenContract light-heavyweight tournament draw was made today.
The groundbreaking competition returns on Saturday as eight of the best light-heavyweight stars from around the world compete at the Brentwood Centre, live on Sky Sports in association with Matchroom Boxing and on ESPN+ in association with Top Rank.
It features Hosea Burton, Steven Ward, Liam Conroy, Tommy Philbin, Bob Ajisafe, Andre Sterling, Serge Michel and Ricards Bolotniks, with the eight fighters each picking a ball from the velvet bag.
There were four blue balls and four red balls, with those who picked a blue ball able to select their opponents from those who picked red balls. The blue balls were numbered one to four to decide in which order they can choose.
Tommy Philbin, Steven Ward, Andre Sterling and Bob Ajisafe selected the balls numbered one to four respectively, while Serge Michel, Ricards Bolotniks, Liam Conroy and Hosea Burton picked red balls.
It meant that the draw has seen Philbin pitted with Michel, Ward going up against Bolotniks, Sterling taking on Conroy and Ajisafe facing off with Burton.
Here's what they all had to say…
Tommy Philbin vs. Serge Michel
Philbin: "I didn't expect to get a blue ball! I picked Serge Michel as he has the same experience as myself, so I'm happy."
ESPN Weights & Photos: Alvarez 174 lbs vs. Seals 173.5 lbs
Michel: "It feels good to have this fight. He has made a wrong pick, I'll show that on the night."
Steven Ward vs. Ricards Bolotniks
Ward: "He's highly-ranked and a good fighter. It's a good challenge for the first fight and I'm looking forward to it."
Luke Keeler says Demetrius Andrade making mistake looking passed him
Bolotniks: "This is a very good fight and I'm happy. I wanted to fight him the most out of everyone and I'm ready for him."
Andre Sterling vs. Liam Conroy
Sterling: "It's a good match up. We have an equal amount of experience so I'm excited."
Conroy: "I'm just buzzing to have been picked as it took the pressure off me not having to choose anyone. I'm ready for anyone."
Bob Ajisafe vs. Hosea Burton
Ajisafe: "It's unexpected to have this fight, but we've just got to crack on and get ready."
Burton: "This is basically the final. I can beat any of these, and Ajisafe can beat any of them. We're ruling the competition, but at least I'll still be going through."
Sky Sports' Andy Clarke: "The fight between Ajisafe and Burton a really interesting fight. They are the two most experienced fighters in the competition and two former British champions.
"They are all good fights and they're all well matched, so I don't really see any fight where you could say there may be a surprise result. Ricards and Sergey may not be as well known to UK fans, but they have both got pedigree, so they're all 50-50 fights."
Following today's dramatic draw, the #GoldenContract fight week activities continue later this week, with the press conference taking place tomorrow.
Former British light-heavyweight king Hosea Burton is fully revved up for next weekend's #GoldenContract quarter-finals.
'The Hammer' (24-1, 11 KOs) takes his place in the eight-man tournament that kicks off at the Brentwood Centre on December 14 – broadcast live on Sky Sports in the UK in association with Matchroom Boxing and on ESPN+ in the US in association with Top Rank.
As he gears up for his second fight of the year, Burton is ready to unleash the frustration of being avoided by the big names.
Burton said: "Winning this tournament would put my career back to where it should have been three years ago, so this is a must-win tournament.
"This will put me where I need to be. I've been ducked and avoided for three years now and this will be big for me.
"It's exciting now the line-up is complete and I just can't wait for it all to happen. It's not an easy tournament because there are a few dangerous names in there, but I'm more than capable of winning it.
"At the end of this tournament, there's a huge contract. What lies beyond this tournament for me will be big nights and world title fights either here or in America.
"That's what I want out of this and that's what's going to happen."
Hosea Burton has never been one to duck a fight. In fact, he's looking for a fight.
Burton has made his intentions known, calling out undefeated Anthony Yarde, man to man, to his face. The two recently encountered one another during Tyson Fury-Deontay Wilder fight week in Los Angeles, California, where Burton was on-hand to support his cousin, Fury.
"Let's make the fight happen," Burton told Yarde. "We're both excited about it. They say I'm not up to you, but let's get it going man."
Burton has gone undefeated for two years, since suffering his lone career defeat at the hands of Frank Buglioni, a fight in which he was winning prior to a final round stoppage. Buglioni has recently retired from the sport, leaving Burton to set his sights on Yarde, rather than avenging his defeat first.
Yarde recently scored a knockout victory over Walter Sequeira, October 20 in Brentwood, improving his record to 17-0 with 16 knockouts.
Burton, however, hasn't been impressed.
"If he's six foot, I must be six foot nine, because he's a lot shorter than that," Burton said of Yarde's stature. "I would be his first live opponent. Let's get it on."
Yarde's world ranking would play well into Burton's plans in 2019, which include fighting for a world title after recapturing his domestic gold.
"This would be one of the biggest domestic light heavyweight fights in UK history. Everyone is already placing Yarde amongst the world's best, but the fact is, he has to get past Hosea," noted Adam Harris of Athlete Development and Management. "We believe Hosea is the one who's ready to go after a world title. Let's have it out and find out who's right."
Burton also plans on showcasing his skills in Canada in the new year, following in the footsteps of his cousin Tyson, the lineal heavyweight champion of the world. Both Tyson and his cousin, Hughie Fury, fought in Canada early in their pro careers, and have held training camps in the Great White North as well.
"Some of the best in the world have been coming to Canada to accelerate their careers," Harris noted, "including Billy Joe Saunders before his most recent fights and, of course, Tyson in the past. We have a special relationship with the country, and the fight scene in Toronto is booming in a way we've never seen before. We have no doubt Hosea will be appreciated and find plenty of competition north of the border."
« WBC to address Dillian Whyte situation this week
Deontay Wilder on Anthony Joshua: 'He was SCARED, afraid of confrontation' against Ruiz »
Boxing » Press News » Golden Contract: The quarter-finals sees Bob Ajisafe and Hosea Burton collide
More boxing news on: Hosea Burton ,- Latest
Devin Haney wants Lomachenko, Ryan Garcia, Tank Davis & Teofimo367 Total Shares

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The subtleties of psychology dictates the rules of usability. But judging by the notorious expression of an expert in the field of information design, humanity is far from both the first and the second. Tonight we have devoted to discussion of the multifaceted concepts as i UX UI. Our speaker, Igor Zakharchuk, confident that a reinforced concrete statistics can and should be corrected! All the more so to understand the design of user interfaces proved very interesting.
By the way, 2005 is the day usability. This year the date falls on November 13.
What to expect web design in 2016? Catch the trends!


Using the 'Advanced Search', you can now search the database by entering a CVSSv2 score range (e.g., 8 to 10) or by a specific CVSSv2 attribute (e.g., Confidentiality : Partial). To search for entries with only a 10 score, use the search range 10 to 10.
Using this search mechanism, we can see there are 3,217 entries in the database with a score of 10 and 9,266 entries that involve a complete loss of availability.
We hope this flexibility allows for even more refined searches to better help your project or organization. Stay tuned, this is one of many new search features planned.


text:
The Commission is working to make the GFSC.gg website as accessible as possible for users. To help us, we follow guidelines recommended by the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) and World Wide Web Consortium's web access initiative.
The Commission's website strives to be as accessible and usable as possible for all users and therefore doesn't have a separate accessibility statement as the site has been designed and developed with this in mind.
We aim for GFSC.gg to be compatible with recent versions of commonly used:
screenreaders
browser screen magnifiers
speech and other assistive technology built into computer and smartphone operating systems.
If you have a vision impairment then please visit the RNIB website for specialist advice such as alternative screen readers, screen magnifiers and other devices that are available and can make using a computer easier.
My Computer My Way was developed by AbilityNet with support from Microsoft and the BBC as a source of accessibility help for all computer users.
This resource explains all the accessibility features available in popular desktop computers, laptops, tablets and smartphones, including Windows, Mac OSX, iOS, Android and Windows Phone. All of these devices have features that enable people to adapt their computer to suit their needs, such as changing the colours and text size or using voice activation.
You can find guidance from the BBC about:
making your mouse easier to use
using your keyboard to control your mouse
alternatives to a keyboard and mouse
increasing the size of the text in your web browser
changing text and background colours
how to magnify your screen
screen readers and talking browsers
Feedback Contact us if you have trouble using GFSC.gg - this will help us to make improvements.
The GFSC is not responsible for the content of external websites.
RNIB
My Computer My Way


Partager la publication "English Essay Writing: Advice On Composing Effortlessly"
Writing an English essay is crucial for everyone. At some time inside our life, we now have encountered many circumstances wherein an essay that is english included. It really is a prerequisite to every little thing around us all. From academic-related tasks to expert matters- understanding how to write an essay that is compelling you in front of other people.


Flowers: head 1 1/2"- 3" wide with 6-16 yellow, 1"- 1 1/3" long, 3-notched rays often with purplish/orange base; 1/2"-1" wide, purplish/orange disk; inflorescence usually 1 to a few heads on long stalks; blooms May-Sept.
Flora of North America: Flora of North America USDA Plants Database: Federal Distribution and detailed information including photos Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources: Rare Species Guide; description, conservation, photos, maps, etc. USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS): Images of seeds, fruits, embryos, etc.


McNary's fall athletic schedules are coming together and if everything sticks the volleyball program will be traveling the most in 2018.
Along with non-league weekend tournaments in South Eugene, Medford, West Linn and Portland, the Lady Celts would play conference games in Bend, Summit and Mountain View.
The new conference would stick with a Tuesday and Thursday schedule with volleyball teams playing each other twice, home and away.
McNary is tentatively scheduled to open the regular season at home against Mountain View on Tuesday, Aug. 28.
All three trips to Bend are also scheduled for Tuesdays—Bend High School on Sept. 4, Mountain View on Sept. 25 and Summit on Oct. 2. Junior varsity teams would play at 4 p.m. followed by varsity at 6.
McNary's girls soccer team would do the least amount of traveling in 2018.
The Lady Celts would go to Bend only once in the last game of the regular season on Tuesday, Oct. 16. The girls would then play at Mountain View and Summit in 2019.
McNary's non-league games include home contests against Forest Grove, Aloha and St. Mary's and trips to Oregon City, Sheldon and Lincoln.
The boys soccer team would travel to Summit on Friday, Oct. 28 and Mountain View on Tuesday, Oct. 9.
The Celtics would host Central, Westview, Centennial and Gresham in non-conference play and travel to Aloha, Canby and Madison.
Cross Country wouldn't travel to Bend until the end of the season for the district meet. The 2019 district meet would then take place in Salem.
McNary athletic director Scott Gragg said all schedules are tentative and won't be finalized until May. Football schedules are still being ironed out.


text:
The Eastern Local School District is a public school district based in the community of Reedsville, Ohio, United States.

The school district includes all of Orange and Olive townships as well as most of Chester Township, the northern portion of Lebanon Township, and a very small portion of far eastern Bedford Township.

Eastern Local Schools serve several unincorporated communities in northeastern Meigs County, including Reedsville, Chester, Long Bottom, and Tuppers Plains.

Schools
Eastern High School  (Grades 9-12)
Eastern Elementary School (Grades K-8)

See also
List of school districts in Ohio

External links
Eastern Local School District – Official site.

School districts in Ohio
Education in Meigs County, Ohio

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Off Market | 2724 CABRILLO Avenue | JB Real Estate & Investment Inc.
Hey ! I would like to request a showing of 2724 CABRILLO Avenue. Let me know what times you are available. Thank you!
Welcome home! You will find this beautiful townhome in the Cabrillo Walk community. Built in 2006, this 3 bedroom/2.5 bath was built with you in mind. As you enter, you are welcomed by the free flowing floor plan. There is a fireplace in the living room to warm up the chilly nights or just create a warm ambiance. The kitchen has a center island, ready for you to prepare a feast. Upstairs, all the bedrooms await. The	read more master bedroom has a walk in closet, separate bath tub and shower, his and her vanity; no more fighting who has to get ready first. Well this is all topped off with a balcony off the master bedroom. See yourself enjoying your morning coffee or evening night cap. Did we mention the 4 car garage? Yes 4 car garage, no more fighting who gets to park inside! There is more to see, so please come and see for yourself. Come make this house your home . Welcome home!
This listing is courtesy of the listing agent Sung Ah Seo (#CLW-C124393), with the office New Star Realty.


text:
MagazineOp - Ed
Editorial: Bringing Our Waste Management to First World Level
by Juhea Kim
Recently, The New York Times published a piece arguing that "the Reign of Recycling" is all but over. The author John Tierney argues that despite the fact that recycling has become a political and moral high ground, it actually incurs more financial and environmental costs to recycle and reuse rather than to just send all waste to landfill. Such a message against our current paradigm certainly feels sacrilegious. But when the facts are considered objectively, does his argument actually hold water?
Tierney lists some logical-sounding reasons recycling might be futile, or even environmentally harmful: washing out plastic containers with "water heated by coal-derived electricity," can result in more carbon emissions than simply throwing them out, for instance. That sounds feasible until you consider the fact that over 60% of electricity generated in the U.S. uses a source other than coal. Coal use for electric power has decreased steadily in recent decades and continues on that downward trend. So basing the futility of recycling on the energy wasted to wash out the containers seems circumstantial at best.
Tierney also views landfills favorably, arguing that there is more than enough room to go around. He writes:
"One of the original goals of the recycling movement was to avert a supposed crisis because there was no room left in the nation's landfills. But that media-inspired fear was never realistic in a country with so much open space."
This boast of land-richness is the unfortunate mindset that has led Americans to become the most wasteful people in the history of the world, still to this day consuming more and leaving more carbon footprint than any other nation. We've got resources, we'll use it; we've got land, we'll use it to bury all of our filth! Who cares what other countries are doing, those countries don't have wide expansive wilderness in which to dump all their garbage.
Aside from the flawed moral underpinning, his arguments are partial and selective. He posits that rural communities "welcome" landfills to receive economic benefits, and that in such a large country as ours, all trash generated by Americans for the next 1,000 years would be contained in just 0.1% of our grazing land. These rural landfills, he writes, are hidden by "plenty of greenery" and will eventually be turned into parks like in Staten Island. This speculation of course completely overlooks the fact that in rural communities so lacking in economic opportunities as to welcome landfills, it's improbable that the said landfills will eventually become green parks for the enjoyment of their small populations.
While he paints such an idyllic picture of landfills, he scorns composting centers as the nadir of cleanliness with "nauseating odors, swarming rats and defecating sea gulls." Does Tierney really miss that landfills are all those things, multiplied by so many factors?
He also attempts to bring in the outside examples the "affluent people" aspire to in their environmentalism: the Nordic countries. In support of sending garbage to landfills and incinerating them for energy, Tierney writes:
"Modern incinerators, while politically unpopular in the United States, release so few pollutants that they've been widely accepted in the eco-conscious countries of Northern Europe and Japan for generating clean energy."
This is also superficially reasonable-sounding. It's true that in these countries burning garbage to generate energy has taken firm hold. What he is omitting blindly is that in all of these countries, recycling is the law. If he ever travels to Scandinavia and makes his case against recycling, he would be heavily criticized and ridiculed. Official site of Sweden proudly proclaims that "more than 99 per cent of all household waste is recycled in one way or another" in their country, and that they generate the least landfill waste almost anywhere in the world. And even so, they officially state that they can do even more to shift "from burning to material recycling, by promoting recycling." Their recycling is so structured that they even collect unused medicine. Their waste management focuses and depends on recycling and composting first and foremost before incineration comes into play.
This doesn't just apply to Sweden, but also to other countries who have far more advanced waste management system than we do. In South Korea, everything must be disposed of separately: in households, you must dispose your food waste separated from other garbage. Even different kinds of plastic must be sorted out. All waste must be in specific, labeled plastic bags that you must purchase (which in turn is used to fund waste treatment costs). Should you fail to do so, not only are you fined, you'll be shunned by neighbors and your garbage man will refuse to pick up your waste. All businesses are required by law to recycle and compost, and at a fast food restaurant, you must throw out your compost, dry waste, papers, and different kinds of plastics separately. Similar astringent recycling is practiced in Japan. My cousin who lives in Japan was shocked to discover that in America, one isn't required to recycle bottle and bottle cap separately (or, recycle at all).
This must sound like a lot of hassle to one like Tierney, but to people who are accustomed to such orderliness, this is normal behavior. Still he mocks that recycling "makes people feel virtuous, especially affluent people who feel guilty about their enormous environmental footprint. It is less an ethical activity than a religious ritual, like the ones performed by Catholics to obtain indulgences for their sins." He argues that like religious ritual, recycling should be voluntary, not mandatory, activity–and that governments have no right to impinge upon individual's right to just disregard recycling.
On the contrary, recycling isn't just there as moral clutch for "affluent people" he keeps mentioning. First, the desire to be good citizens in our communities and in the greater world is common in all of us, no matter what our socioeconomic status. Polluted Earth impacts all of us, and most of us are well aware of that fact–it's not a class-based statement. So his attempts to characterize recycling as a pretentious status symbol is small-minded, cynical, polarizing, and self-serving–just like the way some politicians will create distinctions between demographics to meet their ends.
Secondly, recycling works. It is the law of countries he mentions as examples of advanced waste management; those countries base their systems first and foremost on recycling and composting, to the effect that overall landfill waste is greatly reduced, dramatically lowering their carbon footprint.
Third–his final statement that "cities have been burying garbage for thousands of years, and it's still the easiest and cheapest solution for trash" reveals precisely the kind of mindset that has led our planet to its sickened state, today. Yes, dumpling waste into landfill is "easy" and "cheap" just like a McDonald's burger: it's also unhealthy (think toxic waste seeping into our land), harmful to the environment, and most of all, we just don't want it anymore. We want to move forward, progress, and do things better. Truth is that as a country, we're more like a developing country than a developed one when it comes to our waste management. Easy no longer serves us. We want recycling.
More in Editorial: Climate Change Lesson from Pope Francis
Get more like this–sign up for our newsletter for exclusive inspirational content!
Photo: Timothy Takemoto via Flickr
The Great Barrier Coral Reef Blooms, Bringing Hope
Southern Resident Orcas Are Still In Trouble. Here's The Research-Backed Way To Save Them
Opinion: Why We're Hardwired with Compassionate Instinct
Opinion: Why Do Vegan Companies Still Use Palm Oil?
editorialenvironment
Juhea Kim
Originally from Portland, Oregon, Juhea now lives in NYC with her Oreo cookie cat, Zeus. When she is not writing, she enjoys running in Central Park, yoga, and teaching Barre classes. Follow Juhea on Instagram @peacefuldumpling, Google+ and Pinterest.


Introducing the new and improved FOXTROT© Survival Capsule Peanut Lighter X3 and Matchbox. This set includes three stainless steel capsule peanut lighters and one stainless steel reusable matchbox. The lighters are pleasing to the eye and concealable like no other. The great thing about the FOXTROT© lighters and matchbox, are the versatility. Both items include the durability needed for outdoor activities and the waterproof capability needed for an active lifestyle. When the lighter and the matchbox are closed, the waterproof exterior protects the lighting functions of the lighter and matchbox. It will not rust either, which is important for the longevity of the items. Both matchbox and lighter are completely concealable. The design was to protect and hide away in the smallest of areas. The lighter is 1.87" long by 0.5" wide. The matchbox is 1.87" long by 1.13" wide. These items are also refillable, just like a zippo lighter. Each lighter and matchbox come with a carabiner hook that you can easily attach to your keychain, backpack zipper, or belt loop. These lighters are great for a variety of outdoor activities like hunting, fishing, hiking, backpacking, adventurers, thrill seekers, mountain climbers, camping, travelers, and trail blazers. These items are 100% money back guaranteed and shipped fast from the United States of America!!! What are you waiting for? Get that one item that all of your friends will want!
FUN NOVELTY ITEM - it's not everyday you come across an item that all your friends will love. Three lighters can be shared with others too. Makes a great gift for the outdoor lovers.
VERSATILE - the FOXTROT© lighter and matchbox can be used in a variety of outdoor activities such as camping, hiking, hunting, fishing, or any adventure you decide to go on.
If you have any questions about this product by FOXTROT, contact us by completing and submitting the form below. If you are looking for a specif part number, please include it with your message.


text:
Changi Airport, STB and Qantas sign agreement for boosting Singapore air traffic
CtoI News Desk Tuesday, March 13th 2018
To boost the number of visitors to Singapore, Changi Airport Group (CAG), Singapore Tourism Board (STB) and Australia's Qantas jointly announced a SGD5 million partnership today.
The main aim of the partnership is to promote Singapore as a destination and a connecting gateway to Asia, Europe and Australia.
"The three-year tripartite Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) will see all parties work together on a series of joint marketing campaigns in Australia, the United Kingdom and Southeast Asia to promote travel on Qantas services via Singapore," said a joint news release issued today.
The main aim of the partnership is to promote Singapore as a destination and a connecting gateway to Asia, Europe and Australia. Photo courtesy: CAG
Alan Joyce, Qantas Group CEO, said the partnership is aimed at boosting the number of people travelling through Singapore from key markets in Australia and the UK.
"Singapore is Qantas' largest hub outside of Australia, carrying more than 20 per cent of our wide-body fleet. It is a cornerstone city in our international network strategy and plays an important role in our ability to respond to the incredible growth we are seeing in travellers from Asia," said Joyce.
Commenting on the partnership, Lionel Yeo, STB's Chief Executive said, "The partnership presents an opportunity to drive more visitor arrivals to Singapore and raise its profile as a quality destination through joint marketing efforts."
Lionel Yeo, STB's Chief Executive. Photo courtesy: Linkedin profile of Lionel Yeo
"Australia and the UK have always been important source markets for Singapore, ranking 5th and 12th respectively in 2017. The addition of more Qantas services, especially the return of the iconic Kangaroo Route, is set to draw even more visitors from the two countries," he added.
"This new partnership builds on STB's approach of cultivating strategic partnerships with airlines and industry partners to promote Singapore, grow visitor arrivals and achieve tourism success," said Yeo.
In 2017, Changi Airport handled 62.2 million passengers, with about 30 per cent transiting through the airport, and it is also the most connected international airport to Australia, both in terms of the number of city links and weekly seats available.
Changi Airport will also offer 53 weekly services between Singapore and London as Qantas has taken the decision to shift the transit point for its Sydney-London flights to Singapore.
Lee Seow Hiang, CEO of Changi Airport Group. Photo courtesy:CAG
From April 2018, Qantas will operate over 50 return services in to and out of Changi Airport each week, making it one of the largest foreign airlines to operate out of the Singapore airport.
Lee Seow Hiang, Changi Airport Group's CEO said, "Today's travellers are increasingly discerning and selective, and this partnership is timely in raising efforts to differentiate Singapore as a seamless stop over point as well as destination."
"With Jewel Changi Airport set to open in 2019, this new partnership will strengthen efforts to raise awareness of Singapore as a compelling transit point as well as an exciting destination in its own right which is a win for all," he added.


Spend your days off from school learning and playing outside at the Hitchcock Center! We'll explore topics in winter ecology while playing games, making crafts and spending time with our live animals. Sign up for as many days as you wish. Limited to 15 participants per age group.


text:
A 19.ª etapa da Volta a Espanha de 2017 teve lugar a 8 de setembro de 2017 entre Caso e Gijón sobre sobre um percurso escarpado de 149,7 km.

Classificação da etapa

Classificações ao final da etapa

Classificação geral

Classificação por pontos

Classificação por equipas

Ligações externas

 Página oficial
19


Double W Dairy of Holyoke is preparing to say goodbye to Jonas Stocker, 20, a native of Switzerland and their intern dairy herdsman since November.
Holyoke is Stocker's third and final stop on an internship that has included positions in Iowa and British Columbia, Canada.
Stocker said American farms are huge compared to his home farm near the Swiss city of Lucerne, and Double W Dairy is the largest lot he's worked on so far.
In spite of this, he said he's been impressed with how American dairies balance efficiency with the humane treatment of their livestock.
Marc Wailes — who co-owns and operates Double W Dairy with his wife Janel, Marc's brother Gregg and Glenn Huwa — said the lot milks 1,300 cows, while Stocker's home farm milks about 70, and the average Swiss farm owns around 25.
Also, while in Switzerland cattle spend most of their time indoors, Double W Dairy incorporates outside lots. American farms also have digital record keeping systems, which they need to keep track of the high volume of livestock.
Still, Stocker said one of his favorite parts of Double W Dairy was providing hands-on care for the lot's Brown Swiss cattle. Stocker's family raises the same breed.
He said he also enjoyed picking up Spanish and getting to meet the dairy's herdsman team.
Stocker lived with Marc and Janel during his time in Holyoke, which Marc said gave him the chance to know the intern personally.
"He's just like one of us, and he's been a hard worker," Marc said. Stocker typically works from sunup to sundown, filling in wherever he's needed, including helping with breeding, taking cows to market and caring for sick animals.


text:
import org.apache.flink.runtime.jobmanager.JobManager;
import org.apache.flink.runtime.taskmanager.TaskManager;
import org.apache.hadoop.conf.Configuration;
import org.apache.hadoop.fs.FileSystem;
import org.apache.hadoop.fs.Path;
import org.slf4j.Logger;
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;

/**
 * The FlinkBootstrap serves as the entry point to Flink as an micro
 * service.
 */
public final class FlinkBootstrap {
    private static final Logger LOG = LoggerFactory.getLogger(FlinkBootstrap.class);

    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {

        if (args.length != 2) {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException("Provide `TaskManager` or `JobManager` parameter with config folder");
        }

        //Load Hadoop S3 wrapper classes, due to ClassNotFound Exception without
        Class.forName("org.apache.flink.runtime.fs.hdfs.HadoopFileSystem");
        Class.forName("org.apache.hadoop.fs.s3a.S3AFileSystem");

        //Verify s3 is accessible
        Configuration conf = new Configuration();
        conf.addResource(new Path("config/hadoop/core-site.xml"));
        conf.addResource(new Path("config/hadoop/hdfs-site.xml"));
        FileSystem fs = FileSystem.get(conf);
        fs.listStatus(new Path("s3://dir"));

        if (args[0].equals("TaskManager")) {
            TaskManager.main(new String[]{
                "--configDir", args[1],
            });
        } else if (args[0].equals("JobManager")) {
            JobManager.main(new String[]{
                "--configDir", args[1],
                "--executionMode", "cluster",
            });
        } else {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unknown parameter `" + args[0] + "`");
        }
    }
}


>>>> this means that the ISP and the internal network nameservers will both have SOA record for the domain.
>>> it's not really anything particularly related to samba or dlz.  it's just two different computers serving the same zone.  you're just "hijacking" or overloading that particular label.  in addition to declaring the zone in your config, you'll need to delegate that new zone from the parent.
>>> it's worth noting that this scales poorly.  having to add delegations and zone declarations for every label for which this is desired becomes quickly prohibitive.  instead, i'd suggest using a subdomain for samba - e.g. something like ad.example.com.  there are a number of other solutions as well which would likely be more sensible than hijacking labels.
>> If it was more than just a few labels I would do it another way.
>> But this will suffice, if I can only get bind to actually get the forward zone working.
>> I don't need any delegation.  I'm not looking to slave the zone.
> as i said, you'll need to delegate that new zone from the parent.  i'm not sure what slaves zones would have to do with that.
which holds the SOA for the external answers.
And sure delegation works.  You don't even need a forward zone.
have not been able to get the forward zone working.


text:
https://bit.ly/ProcopiusA13E
This webpage reproduces a Chapter of
Procopius
published in the Loeb Classical Library,
The Anecdota
or Secret History
Chapter XIII
p155 Now the case stood as I have said as regards p157 the opinion of most of the people. And while Justinian was such as I have described in respect to his character in general, he still shewed himself approachable and kindly to those who came into contact with him; and no man whatever had the experience of being excluded from access to him, but on the contrary he was never angry even with those who failed to observe decorum as to standing or speaking in his presence. 2 However, he did not, on that account, blush before any of those destined to be ruined by him. Indeed he never allowed himself to shew anger, either, or exasperation, and thus to reveal his feelings to those who had given offence, but with gentle mien and with lowered brows and in a restrained voice he would give orders for the death of thousands of innocent men, for the dismantling of cities, and for the confiscation of all monies to the Treasury. 3 And one would infer from this characteristic that he had the spirit of a lamb. Yet if anyone sought to intercede through prayers and supplications for those who had given offence and thus to gain for them forgiveness, then, "enraged and showing his teeth,"1 he would seem to be ready to burst, so that no one of those who were supposed to be intimate with him had any hope after that of getting the desired pardon.
4 And while he seemed to have a firm belief as regards Christ, yet even this was for the ruin of his subjects. For he permitted the priests with comparative freedom to outrage their neighbours, and if they plundered the property of the people whose lands p159 adjoined theirs, he would congratulate them, thinking that thus he was shewing reverence for the Deity. 5 And in adjudicating such cases, he considered that he was acting in a pious manner if any man in the name of religion succeeded by his argument in seizing something that did not belong to him, and, having won the case, went his way. For he thought that justice consisted in the priests' prevailing over their antagonists. 6 And he himself, upon acquiring by means which were entirely improper the estates of persons either living or deceased and immediately dedicating them to one of the Churches, would feel pride in this pretence of piety, his object, however, being that title in these estates should not revert to the injured owners. 7 Nay, more, he carried out an indefinite number of murders to accomplish these ends. For in his eagerness to gather all men into one belief as to Christ, he kept destroying the rest of mankind in senseless fashion, and that too while acting with a pretence of piety. For it did notº seem to him murder if the victims chanced to be not of his own creed. 8 Thus his single interest was the ceaseless destruction of men, and in company with his spouse he never ceased contriving accusations leading to this end. 9 For these two persons had their desires for the most part akin, and where they did actually chance to differ in their characters, though each of them was base, yet by displaying the most opposite tendencies they kept destroying their subjects. 10 For he was lighter than dust in his judgment, always submitting himself to p161 those who from time to time wished to lead him into evil according to their whims, — unless indeed the project involved an act of kindness or loss of gain — and endlessly listening to "fawning speeches."2 11 For his flatterers could persuade him with no difficulty that he was raised to the skies and "walking the air."3
12 And one occasion Tribonianus, who was acting as •Assessor to him, said that he was exceedingly fearful lest some day on account of his piety he might unawares be swept up into the heavens. Such praises, or rather gibes, he would interpret in accordance with the fixed conviction4 of his mind. 13 But even when, should it so happen, he expressed his admiration for the virtues of some man, a little later he would be reviling him as a scoundrel. And after abusing one of his subjects, he would turn about and seem to praise him, shifting his ground for no cause at all. 14 For his thinking ran in a direction exactly contrary to what he himself said and to what he wished to appear. 15 I have already described his character with regard to personal friendship and enmity, citing as evidence for the most part the things the man actually did. 16 For as an enemy, he was sure and unswerving, but to his friends very untrustworthy. Consequently he really caused the ruin of great numbers who had been cultivated by him, but he never became a friend to anyone whom he had once hated. 17 But those whom he seemed to know best and to regard as most p163 intimate he after no long time betrayed to their destruction by delivering them as a favour to his consort or to someone else, even though he was well aware that they would die solely because of their loyalty to him. 18 For he was conspicuously untrustworthy in all things except, to be sure, his cruelty and his avarice. For to make him give up this last proved an impossible task for any man. 19 But also in those matters in which his spouse was not able to persuade him, by injecting into the argument the hope of large sums of money to accrue from the transaction she could win over her husband quite against his will to the action she desired. 20 Indeed for the sake of unseemly gain he never refused either to set up laws or again to tear them down.
21 And he rendered judgment, not according to the laws which he himself had written, but according as he was influenced by the vision of a greater or more magnificent promise of money. 22 For he even believed that to take away the property of his subjects by small thefts brought no disgrace whatever upon him — in those cases, namely, where he was not able to take everything at once on some pretence, either by advancing an unexpected accusation or by the pretext of a will never made. 23 And while he ruled over the Romans, neither good faith nor belief in God remained secure, no law remained fixed, no transaction safe, no contract valid. 24 And when any of his intimates were sent by him on some mission, if they had the fortune to destroy many of those whom they encountered and to plunder a quantity of money, p165 they immediately seemed to the Emperor worthy both to be and to be called men of distinction, as having carried out with exactness all their instructions; but if when they returned to him they had shewn mercy to men in any way, he was offended with them thereafter and hostile. 25 And despairing of the ability of these men, as being somehow out of date, he no longer called them to service. Consequently many were eager to shew him how base they could be, even though their usual conduct was not of such sort. 26 And in certain cases, after making a promise many times and making his promise more binding by an oath or by a writing, he straightway became wilfully forgetful, thinking that this conduct brought him some credit. 27 And Justinian continued to act thus, not only to his subjects, but also to many of his enemies, as I have stated previously.5
28 And he was not given to sleep, as a general thing, and he never filled himself to repletion with either food or drink, but he usually just touched the food with the tips of his fingers and went his way. 29 For such matters seemed to him a kind of side-issue imposed upon him by Nature, for he often actually remained without food two days and nights, especially when the time before the festival called Easter led that way. 30 For on that occasion he many times abstained from food for two days, as has been said,6 and insisted upon living on a little water and certain p167 wild plants,a and after sleeping perhaps one hour he would spend the rest of the time walking about constantly. 31 And yet, if he had been willing to spend just this Easter-tide on good deeds, affairs would have advanced to a high pitch of prosperity. 32 But as it was, by employing his natural strength for the ruin of the Romans, he succeeded in pulling down to the ground their whole political structure. For he made it his task to be constantly awake and to undergo hardships and to labour for no other purpose than to contrive constantly and every day more grievous calamities for his subjects. 33 For he was, as has been said,7 particularly keen in devising and swift in executing unholy deeds, so that in the end even his natural good qualities resulted in the undoing of his subjects.
1 Cf. Aristophanes, Peace, 620, ἠγριωμένους ἐπ' ἀλλήλοισι καὶ σεσηρότας.
❦
2 Plato, Theaetetus, 175E.
3 Aristophanes, Clouds, 225, ἀεροβατῶ καὶ περιφρονῶ τὸν ἥλιον; Plato, Apology, 19C.
4 i.e. in accordance with the fixity of his ideas concerning himself. Cf. also xiv.21 and xv.1. The phrase is taken from (p161)Thucydides II, 89, where, however, the meaning is "the steadfastness of (their) resolution." Procopius means to say that Justinian was so convinced of his own genius that he took all such jests seriously.
5 Book VIII.xxv.7 ff.
6 Chap. xii.27; Procopius gives an illustration of these traits in Buildings, I.vii.7, 8.
7 Book III.ix.25; Chap. viii.26.
Thayer's Note:
a To my mind at least, there is a very strong hint here of the bitter herbs of the Jewish Passover, which may have found its way into the fasting ritual for the triduum, the three days (counting inclusively) between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection that were so conspicuously observed in early Christianity. Procopius, who strikes me and many others as the most nominal of Christians at best, and very likely a crypto-pagan, would not be familiar with the private devotional exercises of pious Christians. The connection is even clearer in another passage of Procopius (Buildings, I.7.7), in which he seems to understand the practice a bit better; which, parenthetically, should probably be added to the internal evidence for the view that the Buildings was written later than the Secret History.
Anecdota
(Secret History)
OFFSITE:
Atwater translation
Page updated: 9 Jun 20