If the bombardment [of London by V-bombs] really becomes a serious nuisance and great rockets with far-reaching and devastating effect fall on many centres . . . I may certainly have to ask you to support me in using poison gas. We could drench the cities of the Ruhr and many other cities in Germany in such a way that most of the population would be requiring constant medical attention.
The rain of large sparks, blowing down the street, were each as large as a five-mark piece. I struggled to run against the wind but could only reach a house on the corner of the Sorbenstrasse . . . .[We] couldn't go on across the Eiffestrasse because the asphalt road had melted. There were people on the roadway, some already dead, some still lying alive but stuck in the asphalt. They must have rushed onto the roadway without thinking. Their feet had got stuck and then they had put out their hands to try to get out again. They were on their hands and knees screaming.
The conclusion was getting hard to avoid even before the advent of nuclear weapons: the game of war is up, and we are going to have to change the rules if we are to survive. The brief, one-sided campaigns of well-armed Western countries against dysfunctional ThirdWorld autocracies kill in the tens of thousands, and the genocidal ethnic conflicts of fragile post-colonial states are local tragedies, but during the last two years of World War II, over one million people were being killed each month. If the great powers were to go to war with one another just once more, using all the weapons they now have, a million people could die each minute. They have no current intention of doing that, but so long as the old structures survive, Big War is not dead. It is just on holiday.
It is technology that has invalidated all our assumptions about the way we run our world but the easiest and worst mistake we could make would be to blame our current dilemma on the mere technology of war. Napalm, nerve gas, and nuclear weapons were not dropped into our laps by some malevolent god; we put a great deal of effort into inventing and producing them because we intended to fight wars with them.
A lot of people know that seventy thousand died at Hiroshima, but few people know that two hundred and twenty-five thousand died in Tokyo, as a result of only two raids with conventional bombs. I was a bomber pilot a long time ago. I bombed Hamburg. Seventy thousand people died there when the air caught fire. Eighty thousand or so died at Dresden. And if you want to talk about numbers, one hundred and twenty-three thousand died at Iwo Jima . . . and so the problem is war, not nuclear war.
Man in the street in Washington, D.C.
The essential soldier remains the same. Whether he was handling a sling-shot weapon on Hadrian's Wall or whether he's in a main battle tank today, he is essentially the same.
The soldier was one of the first inventions of civilization, and he has changed remarkably little over the five thousand years or so that real armies have existed. The teenage Iranian volunteers stumbling across minefields east of Basra in 1984 or the doomed British battalions going over the top in the July Drive on the Somme in 1916 were taking part in the same act of sacrifice and slaughter that destroyed the young men of Rome at Cannae in 216 BC. The emotions, the odds, and the outcome were fundamentally the same. Battle, the central act of civilized warfare, is a unique event in which ordinary men willingly kill and die as though those extraordinary actions were normal and acceptable. Changes in weapons and tactics have not altered those essential elements of its character.
However, the consequences of war can and do change. Force is the ultimate argument, and once it has been invoked, the only effective reply is superior force. The internal logic of war has frequently caused it to grow far bigger in scale than the importance of the issue originally at dispute would justify. In our time, the likely consequences of major war have grown drastically and irreversibly, so that they potentially include the destruction of the entire human habitat. Yet modern soldiers do not behave any more ruthlessly than their ancestors.
The residents of Dresden and Hiroshima in 1945 suffered no worse fate than the citizens of Babylon in 680 BC, when the city fell to Sennacherib of Assyria, who boasted: "I levelled the city and its houses from the foundations to the top, I destroyed them, and I consumed them with fire. I tore down and removed the outer and inner walls, the temples and ziggurats built of brick, and dumped the rubble in the Arahtu canal. And after I destroyed Babylon, smashed its gods and massacred its population, I tore up its soil and threw it into the Euphrates so that it was carried by the river down to the sea."2 It was a more labour-intensive method of destruction than nuclear weapons, but the effect (at least for an individual city) was about the same.
Then we hear the voices of the Iraqi soldiers, and the idling diesel engines of their vehicles. Johnny and I low-crawl to the top of the rise while the rest of the team prepares to cover our right flank . . . . And then we hear the engine of their troop carrier move from idle to acceleration, and the slow, deep throaty drawl of the men's voices is gone, and we know that we've been just missed again . . . .
It would be nice if it were as simple as that, but it isn't. A few days later the war is coming to a sudden end, and Corporal Swofford, one of two snipers in a perfect position overlooking an Iraqi airfield, is begging for permission on the radio to open fire. He is ordered not to by his captain, allegedly because that will deter the Iraqis from surrendering. Swofford doesn't believe it.
It isn't simple at all. The human complexities at the level of an infantry company do not get less complicated at the level of the generals. Indeed, they may be even more complex. War is a huge, multi-faceted, ancient human institution that is deeply entrenched in our societies, our history, and our psyches. No matter which angle we approach it from, we will initially be in the position of one of the blind men trying to describe the elephant. But the best place to begin, perhaps, is at the very heart of the matter: the nature of combat.
Their Majesties lunch with Doris and me, quite simply, at Government House. The King seemed anxious, but he did not . . . really comprehend the uncertainty of the result of all wars between great nations, no matter how well prepared one may think one is.
The military is often criticized for its persistent – and persistently unsuccessful – attempts to reduce all action to routines, rules, and regulations. But all it amounts to, in practice, is a desperate and only partially successful attempt to reduce the immense number of variables with which the professional military officer must contend. To a limited extent the wild card represented by the unpredictable behaviour of his own people under stress can be brought under control by the imposition of uniform training and indoctrination, but there is no comparable way to confine the interplay of will, art, and chance between opponents on the battlefield to a predictable pattern.
Armies try, certainly – there are as many lists of "Principles of War" as there are general staffs, each consisting of ten or a dozen platitudes that are mostly either self-evident or useless to the man who has to take the decision under fire. Combat is an environment that cannot be mastered by set rules. Tactics and strategy must be learned and plans made, but the unpredictable and uncontrollable elements are so large that even the best plans, carried out by the most competent and daring officers, will often fail – and will always change.
A. Well, in my opinion a battle never works; it never works according to plan . . . . The plan is only a common base for changes. It's very important that everybody should know the plan, so you can change easily. But the modern battle is very fluid, and you have to make your decisions very fast – and mostly not according to plan.
Q. But at least everybody knows where you're coming from?
A. And where you're going to, more or less.
Combat at every level is an environment that requires officers to make decisions on inadequate information in a hurry and under great stress, and then inflicts the death penalty on many of those who make the wrong decision – and on some of those who have decided correctly as well. In such an environment, officers must rely on rules of thumb that are no more than rough calculations, distilled from much past experience, of the odds that a given action will succeed. On the whole, officers will cling to these rules even if the laws of chance occasionally betray them.
That may be part of it, but it's better to send an individual than walk out there with your entire force. And I remember pointing to an individual and telling him to go. Now there was one moment of hesitation, when he looked at me: "Do you mean me? Do you really mean it?" And the look I must have given him – he knew that I meant it, and he went across the field.
Everybody was watching that individual. I started sending them across in twos, and it was no problem. Then I took my entire force across. When we were about halfway across, they came up behind us, the VC [Viet Cong], and they were in spiderholes, and they caught most of my unit in the open.
Now tactically I had done everything the way it was supposed to be done, but we lost some soldiers. There was no other way. We could not go around that field; we had to go across it. So did I make a mistake? I don't know. Would I have done it differently [another time]? I don't think I would have, because that's the way I was trained. Did we lose less soldiers by my doing it that way? That's a question that'll never be answered.
The battle drills in which Major Ooley was trained were worked out by experienced professional soldiers, with the aim of minimizing the chance of an unpleasant surprise and limiting the damage done if the surprise happens anyway. Tactical doctrines like these are constantly updated in the light of new experience, and the same process of analysis is applied to operations all the way up the chain of command. An enormous amount of effort now goes into the attempt to create rules that will give modern officers at least some general guidelines on how to combine all the resources under their command successfully on the battlefield; the tactical manuals of today's armies can run into hundreds of pages.
Yet in the end, the product of all this effort is the same, usually no more than programmed uncertainty and never a reliable guide to success. The official doctrines concentrate on manipulating what can be calculated and rationally planned in war, but the large incalculable elements are at best partly constrained by them – the rest is just hidden by the planning process. On the battlefield, the uncertainties cannot be hidden, and real combat is just as much a gamble for General Yossi Ben-Chanaan, who has fought in a number of short, victorious wars, as for Major Ooley, who fought a long, losing war.
Ben-Chanaan commanded a tank brigade on the Golan Heights during the 1973 war in the Middle East, and on the sixth day of the war, with only eight tanks left, he succeeded in penetrating the Syrian front line.
. . . and once we arrived to the rear we took position, and all their positions were very exposed. We opened fire, and for about twenty minutes we destroyed whoever we could see, because we were in a great position there.
I decided to charge and try to get that hill, but I had to leave a couple of tanks in cover; so I charged with six tanks. [The Syrians] opened fire from the flank with antitank missiles, and in a matter of seconds, three out of the six tanks were blown up. There was a big explosion in my tank. I blew out, and I was left there . . . . And also the whole attack was a mistake, I think.
General Ben-Chanaan is a very competent officer, but his attack failed and some of his men died. Yet if there had not been Syrian antitank missiles off on his flank (which he could not possibly have known), his attack would probably have succeeded, and a vital hill would have been taken by the Israelis at the critical time. Many Israelis who died in the subsequent fighting might now be alive, and the armistice line might be a good deal closer to Damascus. At the time, the gamble seemed worth it to Ben-Chanaan; he took a chance, and he was wrong. There are so many variables in combat that a commander cannot control, and so many things that he simply does not know.
Military officers, to be successful in combat, need a very high tolerance for uncertainty. This may seem one of the attributes least likely to be present in the armed forces, with their identical uniforms and rigid system of ranks, their bureaucratic standardizations (of everything from "Swords, Ceremonial, Officers, for the Use of" to the format in which a commander must compose his operational orders), and their apparently generalized intolerance for deviations from the norm of any sort. Yet in fact these are two sides of the same coin.
It is not necessary for Acme Carpet Sales or the Department of Motor Vehicles to regiment their employees and rigidly routinize every aspect of their work, for they operate in an essentially secure and predictable environment. The mail will be delivered each morning, the sales representatives will not be ambushed and killed on the way to their afternoon appointments, and the accounts department will not be driven to mass panic and flight by mortar rounds landing in the parking lot. Armies in peacetime look preposterously over-organized, but peace is not their real working environment.
In battle, the apparent lunacies of orders given and acknowledged in standard forms, of rank formalized to an extent almost unknown elsewhere, of training that ensures that every officer will report his observations of enemy movements in this format rather than some other when there seems no particular virtue in doing it one way rather than another, all find their justification by bringing some predictability and order to an essentially chaotic situation. Even the most bizarre aspect of military organization, the officer-enlisted man distinction, makes a kind of sense in this strange environment.
The rigid division of all military organizations into officers and enlisted men, two entirely separate hierarchies of people covering roughly the same span of age and often, at the more junior levels, doing much the same kind of job, is so universal that it is rarely considered remarkable. Yet armed forces have the most meticulously stratified system of rank to be found anywhere, and they positively flaunt it.
Among all the intricate distinctions of rank, it is the gulf between the officers and the other ranks that is most important. Army lieutenants at the age of twenty or twenty-one will normally be placed in charge of a body of enlisted men who are older and more experienced than themselves. The army will expect them to rely heavily on the judgment of their NCOs, but the final decision and the ultimate responsibility are theirs. Indeed, the twenty-year-old lieutenant is legally of a higher rank than the most experienced and trusted noncommissioned officer in the army (though he would be wise not to exercise his authority without careful consideration). Moreover, in all armies it is deliberately made difficult to transfer from the enlisted ranks to the officer caste.
The historical origins of the officer/man distinction are political and social, but it is striking that even the most formally egalitarian states like revolutionary France or Bolshevik Russia never abolished it. The fundamental reason is that officers must use their men's lives up in order to accomplish the purposes of the state.
You've got to keep distant from [your soldiers]. The officer-enlisted man distance helps. This is one of the most painful things, having to withhold sometimes your affection for them, because you know you're going to have to destroy them on occasion. And you do. You use them up: they're material. And part of being a good officer is knowing how much of them you can use up and still get the job done.
Officers play a very large role in battles, and their casualties are usually higher proportionally than those of the enlisted men. The brief life expectancy of infantry lieutenants on the Western Front in World War I is legendary, but the figures were actually just as bad in World War II.
It occurred to me to count the number of officers who had served in the Battalion since D-Day. Up to March 27th, the end of the Rhine crossing [less than ten months] . . . I found that we had had 55 officers commanding the twelve rifle platoons, and that their average service with the Battalion was 38 days . . . . Of these 53% were wounded, 24% killed or died of wounds, 15% invalided, and 5% survived.
In general, officer casualties in the British and American armies in World War II in the rifle battalions that did most of the fighting, were twice as high proportionally as the casualties among enlisted men. Similar figures seem to apply for most other armies that have seen major combat in the past several centuries. (Suspiciously, the officer casualty rate for American forces in the Vietnam War was slightly below the enlisted rate.)8 Nevertheless, there is a fundamental difference in the officer's experience of battle. He feels as much fear and is exposed to as much danger as his men, but except in the most extreme circumstances, he will not be using a weapon himself. His role is to direct those who do and make them go on doing it. The task officers must perform and the circumstances in which they must do it have instilled in them a very special view of the world and how it works.
The military ethic emphasizes the permanence of irrationality, weakness and evil in human affairs. It stresses the supremacy of society over the individual and the importance of order, hierarchy and division of function.
It accepts the nation state as the highest form of political organization and recognizes the continuing likelihood of war among nation states . . . . It exalts obedience as the highest virtue of military men . . . . It is, in brief, realistic and conservative.
Much of Huntington's classic definition of the "military mind" would have applied to long-serving military officers of the distant past, but there is an added dimension to it now, for it represents the outlook of a separate and specialized profession. Although there have always been full-time specialists in the military art at the lower levels of army command structures, it is only in the past few centuries that there has come into existence in every country an autonomous body of people – the professional military officers – whose sole task is to maintain the armed forces in peacetime and lead them in war.
Profession is the correct word for the calling of the career military officer today, in much the same sense that the word is applied to older professions like medicine or the law. The officer corps is a self-regulating body of men and women with expert knowledge of a complex intellectual discipline. It has a monopoly of the exercise of its function, and the exclusive right to select and train those new members who will be admitted to the discipline. Its client is society as a whole (through the mediation of the government, its sole employer), and it enjoys special privileges in compensation for its grave responsibilities. Like any other profession, it also has a wide range of corporate interests and views to defend and advance. But there is one key respect in which the military is very different from its civilian counterparts: what soldiers call the "unlimited liability" of their contract to serve. Few other contracts oblige the employee to lay down his life when the employer demands it.
Politicians may . . . pretend that the soldier is ethically in no different position than any other professional. He is. He serves under an unlimited liability, and it is the unlimited liability which lends dignity to the military profession . . . . There's also the fact that military action is group action, particularly in armies . . . . The success of armies depends to a very high degree on the coherence of the group, and the coherence of the group depends on the degree of trust and confidence of its members in each other.
Now what Arnold Toynbee used to call the military virtues – fortitude, endurance, loyalty, courage, and so on – these are good qualities in any collection of men and enrich the society in which they are prominent. But in the military society, they are functional necessities, which is something quite, quite different. I mean a man can be false, fleeting, perjured, in every way corrupt, and be a brilliant mathematician or one of the world's greatest painters. But there's one thing he can't be, and that is a good soldier, sailor or airman. Now it's this group coherence and the unlimited liability which, between them, set the military professional apart, and I think will continue to do so.
But this, too, is not the whole of the truth.
I went where I was told to go and did what I was told to do, but no more. I was scared shitless just about all the time.
If blood was brown, we'd all have medals.
Fear is not just a state of mind; it is a physical thing. With its useful mania for questionnaires, the U.S. Army set out during World War II to find out just how much fear affected the ability of soldiers to perform on the battlefield. In one infantry division in France in August 1944, 65 percent of the soldiers admitted that they had been unable to do their jobs properly because of extreme fear on at least one occasion, and over two-fifths said it had happened repeatedly.
In another U.S. infantry division in the South Pacific, over two thousand soldiers were asked about the physical symptoms of fear: 84 percent said they had a violent pounding of the heart, and over three-fifths said they shook or trembled all over. Around half admitted to feeling faint, breaking out in a cold sweat, and feeling sick to their stomachs. Over a quarter said they had vomited, and 21 percent said they had lost control of their bowels.11 These figures are based only on voluntary admissions, of course, and the true ones are probably higher in all categories, especially the more embarrassing ones. James Jones's remark about being "scared shitless" was not just a colourful expression.
This is the raw material with which officers must conduct their battles: men whose training and self-respect and loyalty to their close friends around them are very nearly outweighed by extreme physical terror and a desperate desire not to die. Soldiers in battle, however steady they may appear, are always a potential mob capable of panic and flight, and armies must expend an enormous amount of effort to keep them in action, beginning in basic training and continuing on the battlefield.
The officer's task has grown even more difficult over time, for he no longer has all his men lined up in ranks under the eagle eyes of his NCOs in a situation in which as long as they continue to go through the mechanical motions of loading and firing, they are being militarily effective. Modern ground forces fight in circumstances of extreme dispersion in which it is impossible for the officer to exercise direct supervision and control over his men's actions. Though the structure of command, compulsion, and punishment for poor performance remains in place, the officer must now rely much more on persuasion and manipulation of his men.
You lead by example. 1 don't think it was unknown that 1 was afraid to be shot at. 1 didn't like it, 1 don't think anybody does; but 1 did what had to be done, given the situation at any given time, and 1 think that's a contagious-type thing. When the shooting starts and things start happening, you do what has to be done, and other people start doing what has to be done, and it's a team effort.
If too many soldiers in a unit fail to do their jobs, nobody is likely to survive. This approach to leadership, therefore, often produces acceptable results, especially in small wars like Vietnam, in which casualties are relatively low (only about one in fifty of the U.S. soldiers who served in Vietnam was killed), and episodes of intensive combat are generally brief and intermittent. It was the collapse of morale, not the attrition of combat, that destroyed the U.S. Army's fighting capability in Vietnam.
But in large-scale warfare between regular armies, things are different, and have been for at least the past two generations. In any big battle down to the latter part of the nineteenth century, the dead and wounded on a single day of fighting could amount to up to 40 or 50 percent of the men engaged, and the average figure was rarely less than 20 percent. Given a couple of battles a year, the infantryman stood an even chance of being killed or wounded for each year the war continued – a very discouraging prospect. But for 363 days of the year, it was merely a hypothetical prospect, for he was not in battle or even in close contact with the enemy on those days. He might be cold, wet, tired, and hungry much of the time – if it was the campaigning season and the army was manoeuvring around the countryside – but for a good part of the year he was probably billeted somewhere indoors at night. In such circumstances the high probability that he would be dead or wounded within the year could be dealt with in the same sort of way that everybody deals with the eventual certainty of death.
The navies and air forces of today fight a kind of war that is still recognizably the same in its psychological effects. On a warship there is the constant psychological strain of being below deck knowing that a torpedo could hit at any time, but actual close contact with an enemy rarely averages more than a few hours a month. Even the bomber crews of World War II, whose life expectancy was measured in months, were still fighting that kind of war, although in an extreme form: in between the brief moments of stark terror when the flak or the fighters came too close, they slept between clean sheets and might even get to the pub some evenings. But for armies, things have changed irreversibly.
There is no such thing as "getting used to combat." . . . Each moment of combat imposes a strain so great that men will break down in direct relation to the intensity and duration of their exposure.
The most striking visible sign of the change that has made ground warfare so much harder on the soldiers, paradoxically, is a steep drop in the casualty toll in a day of battle. Unlucky small units can still be virtually exterminated in an hour when something goes badly wrong, but the average daily loss for a division-sized force in intensive combat in World War II was about 2 percent of its personnel. For entire armies, the casualties even on the first day of a great offensive rarely amounted to 1 percent. The lethality of weapons has increased several thousandfold over the past two hundred years, but the extent to which the potential targets of those weapons have spread out is even greater, and it is certainly far safer to be a soldier on any given day of battle today than it was a hundred or a thousand years ago. The problem for the soldiers is that battles can now continue for weeks, with individual units being sent back in at frequent intervals, and the battles may follow each other in quick succession.
The U.S. Army concluded during World War II that almost every soldier, if he escaped death or wounds, would break down after two hundred to two hundred and forty "combat days"; the British, who rotated their troops out of the front line more often, reckoned four hundred days, but they agreed that breakdown was inevitable. The reason that only about one-sixth of the casualties were psychiatric was that most combat troops did not survive long enough to go to pieces.
The amount of time it took soldiers to reach this point varied from individual to individual and could be greatly extended if they had some periods of relief from combat. The principal reason that relatively few entire units collapsed was that the same combat environment that produced these symptoms also caused so many casualties that there was a constant flow of replacements. (The Soviet army's casualties in 1943, for example, were 80 percent of the forces engaged, and the same in 1944.) Most units in prolonged combat in modern war, therefore, consist of an uneasy mixture of some utterly green and unsure replacements, some surviving veterans of many months of combat, most of whom are nearing collapse, and a proportion of soldiers – the larger the better, from the unit's point of view – who are still in transition from the former stage to the latter.
Wherever one surveys the forces of the battlefield, it is to see that fear is general among men, but to observe further that men commonly are loath that their fear will be expressed in specific acts which their comrades will recognize as cowardice. The majority are unwilling to take extraordinary risks and do not aspire to a hero's role, but they are equally unwilling that they should be considered the least worthy among those present . . . .
The experienced professional officer takes an unromantic view of men's behaviour under stress and believes that all his efforts in war amount to no more than trying to build shaky bridges across chaos with highly volatile human material. A young American infantry officer was strikingly frank about these realities to the survivors of his company in a post-combat debriefing that Marshall attended after the company had assaulted a small German fort outside Brest in 1944. The men had made a remarkable seven hundred-yard charge across an open field, causing most of the German garrison to flee, and reached the cover of a hedgerow only fifteen yards from the fort. But they could not then be persuaded to get up and cross the scant remaining distance for seven hours, although only a handful of German defenders remained.
You have a plan. You have an objective. Your men get started with the objective in mind. But in the course of getting to the objective and taking up fire positions disorganization sets in. The men look for cover and that scatters them. Fire comes against them and that scatters their thoughts. They no longer think as a group but as individuals. Each man wants to stay where he is. To get them going again as a group, an officer must expose himself to the point of suicide. The men are in a mental slump; they always get that way when they have taken a great risk . . . . It is harder to get men to mop up after a charge than to get them to charge.
Everything army officers know about the nature of battle leads them toward the same conclusion: that it is an environment where nothing works reliably; and no plan or stratagem succeeds for very long. And everything that they know about human nature tells them that man is a frail and fallible creature who requires strong leadership and firm discipline in order to behave properly and function effectively in combat. This fundamental pessimism about the limits of heroism and idealism is central to the professional soldiers' world, and on the outermost margins of human experience, where they must operate in combat, their assumptions about human nature are absolutely right. So it is only understandable that they are quite ruthless in the ways that they manipulate the ideas and the behaviour of their soldiers.


text:
MEPIS Linux Loses Another Support Site
It seems that MEPIS is having trouble again. Some of you may recall a few bumps in the road in the past for MEPIS and the MEPIS community. Dotmepis.org, set out to fill a niche for the MEPIS community by providing community developed packages and kernels for advanced users. However, according to Josh, webmaster of dotmepis.org, "it has become increasingly clear that the Mepis development team, reasons that are still unexplained to me, is not a fan of what we have been doing."
He went on to state, "I personally cannot say exactly why, or what specifically has caused this rift. What is obvious to me, and the rest of the admin team here at dotMepis, is that a true technical community, with our combined insight and experience does not fit within the current framework of Mepis. We have contributed untold amounts of time and effort in making debs to enhance Mepis, providing support for all types of issues, and building friendships among each other. For some reason, that has apparently angered some within Mepis to the point that they will no longer support our efforts. Rather than continuing on in a more censored fashion, and with no hope of any inputs into improving Mepis, we have decided it is simply time to move on."
Therefore, dotmepis.org will be closing its doors on all 333 of its community members. How is it that a distrowatch #4 distro can have NO developer community? Your guess is as good as mine.
This announcement comes on the coat tails of a release of Professional Quality Sound Applications that were developed by dotmepis and its team. Even Debian proper didn't have the applications that went into this release. Odd that you would feel a release such as this to be a hinderance to your community, but it is obvious by the announcement that this must have been what took place.
The question remains to be answered: Will MEPIS ever be a true Community driven open source flavor of Linux? It could have been what Ubuntu IS, had it allowed a community of developers in. I am confused about how a community of package developers (developing according to Debian package standards) and kernel hackers (developing kernels according to Debian kernel standards) could NOT BE CONSIDERED A WELCOME ASSET TO MEPIS? With the loss of this site, Warren Woodford, the creator of MEPIS, has a lot of explaining to do. He and his official community website, mepislovers.org, have now caused over 500 users and 2 major support websites go down without so much as a WORD. How many lost users will it take before a reply will come out of Morgantown, WV? Is the microphone on? Perhaps time will tell.
Author devnetPosted on 11 May, 2005 10 August, 2013 Categories RantsTags Rants
24 thoughts on "MEPIS Linux Loses Another Support Site"
Joby says:
Mepis has always been its own worst enemy. Warren continues to do these things and alienate his most loyal following.
Back to Ubuntu.
The strange thing is that they don't even attempt to explain it.
helios says:
Stangely unmentioned is the recent move Mepis made to the corporate world and this incident…come on guys…did we get too big for our britches…Josh and I may have had our differences in the past, and often times they were a bit brash and vocal, but no one can deny what this site has done for Mepis…Ya gotta remember…it was those "britches" that covered your ass for so long.
mdl says:
Strange indeed. It would appear that Warren does not like to share. I wonder if he has the right attitude for open source.
Ths kind of thing is the reason I switched to Kanotix months ago.
I am shameless…if you are a kde fan at all, by far the best distro for the desktop is PCLinuxOS. (ahem), I believe that may have been mentioned a time or two. come see us at pclinuxonline.com.
I really like kano's work but once I realized that pclos package management with apt get and synaptic was every bit as good as the "debian way"…I switched over and have not looked back. I do however use Kanotix for a superb rescue disk when my clueless windows friends hose their system.
DigitaLink says:
Okay, seriously, where is it written that Warren MUST reply to anything? If he doesn't want or need the extra support, that's his right, isn't it? Besides, if the loss of these volunteer developer efforts causes Mepis to go to hell in a handbasket, Warren only really has himself to blame for it, these devs will move on and help make another distro even greater, and there are a couple hundred other distros out there for you to play with if you don't like the way Warren's efforts turn out, right? That's the beauty of open source my friends.
muttix says:
Bahhh !!.. stupid gossip :-/
devnet says:
Seriously man,
If it is your project, an issue comes up, and you do nothing…you kill your project. Any project manager knows this…I project managed for the Air Force for around 5 years and if I did what he did, my arse would be toast.
The part that irks me the most is the fact that these devs were ENRICHING MEPIS. They took a bunch of audio apps that many people (if you saw the thread, many, many people were in on the development or in support of the development of it) wanted and ADDED to MEPIS. How cool is that? Imagine if Debian pure did what warren did! Debian wouldn't have SQUAT for packages. That's what really T's me off. MEPIS may be 99.9% Debian compatible but that's where the comparison ends. Because it isn't 100% for the community at all. I know it never was claimed as such…but when a community sprang up around it, Warren has a duty to communicate with that community. Otherwise, he's just allowing these people who beta test his distro to think that they are doing good when they aren't. Kind of like watching a person beat their head against a wall and not doing anything about it.
Jimf says:
One of the things that is very disturbing to me is the fact that one of the mepis team is now spreading rumors on the mepislovers IRC channel and site that the dotmepis team was formerly in the pay of mepis or wanted to be. They are telling people that this is just all sour grapes and jealousy that caused the departure of dotmepis.
Believe me that nothing could be farther from the truth. None of the dotmepis team ever worked for Warren or mepislovers and anything produced there was only for the use of the general users. dotmepis was a totally independent and volunteer effort.
Warren Woodford's absolute refusal to even communicate, no less cooperate, with the advanced user segment of the community made it impossible for dotmepis to continue to participate in any meaningfully way. The continuing FUD that is being spread on mepislovers IRC and site are examples of how dysfunctional some members of the mepis 'team' have made this community.
Plans by the dotmepis team are in the works to serve the Linux community in another capacity, but obviously, mepis has lost a highly skilled and dedicated group of people who will no longer support that Distro. Most in fact will be happy if they never hear the name mepis again.
A long time back when Mepis was still relatively young, I read some really negative, hostile comments Warren had made about the GPL. I immediately steered clear of the distribution, though I hoped that someday he would adjust and become a good open source community member.
But it sounds like Warren is still a traditional control-oriented business person out of his element.
This just confirms again for me that it doesn't matter how polished a distro is if the community isn't strong. My heart belongs to Debian & Ubuntu, they both have a true open source soul.
Where can we find those comments? I googled a bit but did not find them.
dotmil says:
If you're asking about my comments from the closing, they're not online any more; they were part of the site's closing announcement. But devnet's posting is 100% correct; the only parts missing are the parts where I thanked our members for such great support and involvement, and expressed my sincere wishes for the best for all of them.
I would like to say that I have, since the closing was announced, received threats, lies, and cureses of all types in my inbox. I also have seen the vicious and sometimes just plain silly lies being spread about myself and my former admin team. To me, these all add up to perfect examples of why we decided to leave Mepis immediately. Those examples are sadly, mainly coming from the "community" leaders of Mepis. The users, for the most part, have been very supportive and understanding.
I cannot for the life of me understand why so much hatred has been directed towards me by the Mepis community leaders. Anyone who knows me or ever visited our site for more than a few moments would know these lies and attacks are just plain untrue and vicious. Anyway, if you're a business thinking of using Mepis, be prepared for very hostile treatment of you ever disagree with the all mighty Mepis leadership. Be smart, avoid Mepis like the plague.
Josh's .life says:
Yet Another Linux Blog posted a decent news style summary of the dotmepis closing. Please read that if you're interested. I have to go direct a few more addresses to /dev/null in my procmail rules. Boy, almost makes on want to take out a nice fat insur…
dotmil – I lurked extensively at most all mepis related sites and I know your work and have seen your commitmnent. Having looked at all the poison on the different sites and irc chats, I am having trouble understanding why there is such animosity toward you and some of the other developers. I also realize that your heart is with debian, as I also enjoy debian. However, there is a member-rich community that would absolutlely treasure your participation and you would be welcomed with open arms. Please come see us at PCLinuxOS. I can personally assure you that your mere presence there would be not only valued but sincerely appreciated. I do hope that you think seriously about joining us as we are poised to do some pretty remarkable things. Again, thank you for your contributions to the Mepis community and I hope we can look forward to your working with us at PCLinuxOS. You guys deserved much more recognition and thanx than you got.
Thanks Helios.
I would be thrilled to work with PCLOS, but I was under the impression it's also a one-man show under texstar? Anyway, I promise I will check it out and take it into serious consideration. yes Debian is, and likely always will be, where my heart is. However, circumstances over there are somewhat frustrating too and I'm waiting to see what happens with the new DPL.
Either way, I think I'm taking a few days off from everything to recover from this. my heart just isn't into doing much of anything at the moment.
So where to go from here? What distro now?
Josh, While I am not a part of the "Golden Circle", I am active in the proliferation of PCLOS with the blessing of Texstar et al. There IS a loose-knit DevTeam behind Texstar but his mystic and persona lead most folks to believe he is the only member doing development. While he does a great deal of the work, there are many who contribute in their specialized way…mine is simply PR. Email me at helios17 at gmail dot kom We can go from there. You bet you need some time off…this has been a beating for all you guys over there.
slayerboy says:
My question to you dotmil, is how were you and your team treated before things went downhill with Warren?
After swearing at RH in the early years for dependency hell, I went to Debian off and on. The thing that bothers me with Debian is how slow they are to update. It almost seems like there are too many cooks in the kitchen there. When Mepis came out, I gave it a try and I wasn't impressed, but it was better than Debian pure.
I want, in my heart, to love Debian, but I just get a weird feeling lately with them. Ever since I found PCLinuxOS, based off of Mandrake (RPM system), I'm in love. I hate the RPM system, but with Debian's best feature, apt, included in PCLinuxOS, there are virtually no signs of dependency hell that RPM has attached to it, unless I have the rare time when I need to install an RPM outside of Synaptic.
Like helios said, I think the PCLinuxOS camp would love to have help from the community, especially your team. Not trying to start any wars, but PCLOS is really the only Linux distro that JUST WORKS! I've been on it for about a month, and I feel more confident than ever that this is my distro of choice for a LONG time. 🙂
crinklestein says:
I think alot of things are changing for Mepis. I used to sell it on Ebay which, at the time, was completely legal to do so according to their GPL. A few days ago they contacted Ebay and told them to remove all of my auctions because it violated their copyright. I was like WTF?! I contacted Mepis through Technalign and they tell me that it was NEVER legal to sell it for a profit but the GPL says differently. GPL says it doesn't matter HOW much you charge. They tell me that in order to sell it I have to BUY IT FROM THEM and sell it for free. Who the hell would do that?!
skbarr says:
A few days ago they contacted Ebay and told them to remove all of my auctions because it violated their copyright.–
Crinklestein,
I don't get it. What copyright would that be? According to the GPL, you can sell for however much you want.
Ironically, this morning, I was going to install MEPIS, but, when I read here how Warren violates the GPL and kicks developers around as described here, the install is off, and I'm looking for another distro that follows the GPL. Reg Linux User: 385247
Reg Linux Machine: 285369
kuza says:
I had no idea. This is not (IMHO) in the open source spirit. I always saw open source a sort of technological democracy. In fact, this sort of 'do it my way or no way at all' mentality is what I was hoping to get away from when switching to linux. For the most part, I have not been disappointed. For the most part… goodbye, Mepis, it was nice while it lasted. Hmmm… distrowatch, here I come!
They claim that the installer is under their trademark as well as the control center and several pieces of software built into Mepis and that, if I removed those things, then I could do what I want with it. But I seem to remember, though can't find anymore, that on the Mepis.org site there was a FAW section that discussed the selling of Mepis and it said that you COULD sell it if you followed certain guidelines. That you label it as Mepis with the correct version #. That you not make yourself out to be a representative of Mepis, that you give them your email address and where you plan to sell Mepis from. No where did it ever say that you couldn't make a profit from it. And no where do they current tell you what they define as a profit.
Someone who likes Arch says:
dotmil.
Don't be discouraged by Mepis attitude. If they choose to go down the hill. Let them do that.
You can join in Archlinux. It has PKGBUILD help them to maintain the user contributions. The developers currently do not have enough bandwidth to endorse too many user contributed packages.
It is so easy to build with PKGBUILD and pacman does the rest with the dependencies.
All the user needs to do is to try to compile and check the dependencies.
There are less than 2000 packages in arch and it is growing fast.
One thing I like about arch, it is fast, as fast as slackware or gentoo. And it has the greatest and latest major software.
madcap says:
Aye, I was googling for this very humble description of the PCLOS dev team posted in a forum site by a ripper gang member to send as a quote to a friend and chanced upon here. Guess I'm one year too late!!
Even tho I've never tried Mepis, I guess I dislike this Mepis founder more than Steve Balmer maybe ever since I read his GPL compliance FUD comments after v6 was released in the distro site itself. Maybe GPL should put in a clause to ban ppl like him to base stuff on GPLed software? You know like RMS said back in 2001 or somethin, the msg that Free Software tries to spead isn't spreading as fast as the userbase it's pulling in that the Freedom and the Community thing is the most import part of Free Software. It's such a shame that we now have ppl like the Mepis founder a part of it unfortunately.
Maybe Texstar is too freakin humble that we're all so spoiled? I just can't get enough of Tex and the team!!
Previous Previous post: The Linux-Blog Badge
Next Next post: Excellent Linux Article

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Easily backup, synchronize, or restore your files to another drive, FTP server, ZIP file, networked drive, or removable media. Highly configurable, SyncBackSE includes: open/locked file copying; fast backup option; true synchronization; Zip64 support; compression filtering; detailed and easy to read log files; email results; simulated backups and restore; file filters; sub-directory selection; copy verification; background backups; auto-close of programs; easy and expert modes; profile groups; compare files, and an extensive context sensitive help file.
As well as English, SyncBackSE is also available in French, German, Spanish, Italian, Dutch, Polish, Brazilian Portuguese, Hungarian, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional Chinese.
SyncBackSE, developed by 2BrightSparks, is a multi-award winning solution with tens of thousands of users. SyncBackSE provides a dependable way of ensuring digital files are safe with a simple interface that enables the first time user to backup and save their valuable data within minutes. As well as an \\'Easy Mode\\' for essential backup, restore, and synchronization tasks, SyncBackSE has an \\'Expert Mode\\' that delivers advanced functionality. If you need to backup to an FTP server or network and email the results this is where you\\'ll fine-tune the software. SSL (implicit and explicit), MODE Z compression, and one-time-passwords are supported.
Help is always close to hand if you run into difficulties. A comprehensive context sensitive help file provides easily accessible instructions and guidance about all aspects of using SyncBackSE. Simply click a help button at the bottom of the window you happen to have open, and you\\'ll get taken straight to the help page for that task. In addition an extensive Frequently Asked Questions section provides all the answers you\\'re likely to ask when carrying out a backup, restore, or synchronization task. A lively public forum is also available at the website.
EZ Backup Eudora Pro makes it easy to backup your Eudora mail, address book and settings to a local drive, network folder, CD/DVD and even to a remote FTP server!


Religious schools instill an attitude of respect in children towards the teacher and spiritual leaders from early childhood. This tradition comes from spiritual principles. But since mostly secular people come to Kabbalah, it is very difficult for them to change their attitude towards teachers, which they have become accustomed to in school and college.
We are not used to attributing a higher degree to the teacher who gives us spiritual attainment. We think that a teacher recites things written in books and sometimes provides more detailed explanations.
It is incomprehensible and unnatural that in the Kabbalistic approach you receive spirituality through the teacher. But in Kabbalah, adhesion with the teacher precedes adhesion with the Creator. It is impossible to attain greater trepidation in relation to the Creator, than the kind that you feel in relation to your spiritual teacher and the group. This is the way a person builds himself; this is why the entire world has been given to him.
But you need to work on it; otherwise, you will not attain the goal. Lack of respect for the teacher is a modern problem, which shows us how much we still need to correct ourselves. This is not a coincidence, but an enormous addition of egoism, which needs to be corrected.
This additional egoism is additional distance, which separates us from the Creator, and it shows through the fact that we don't respect the group or the teacher and thus distance ourselves from the Creator.
When I was a student, what helped me correct my attitude was that I was always imagining the higher system where we all exist, but which is concealed from us. And in this system, every one who is lower is absolutely attached to his upper. The actual system did not break; the breaking only took place in our perception. Our entire work consists of bringing ourselves to the point where we are able to perceive and reveal the actual system.
And once the spiritual system becomes revealed, the connections between all its parts will also be revealed to us. The ladder of spiritual degrees does not change, and when one soul becomes revealed first, and another one is revealed after it, this order remains forever. And this is why we will always receive through the great spiritual fathers, Kabbalists, who have lived before us and completed their corrections. We will always receive through Baal HaSulam and Rabash.
And if you continue this path and once merit spiritual attainment, you will receive it through me. This is the way the spiritual ladder is.
We need to work on this, otherwise a connection will not appear between us. It is written: "Make yourself a Rav ('Rav' means big) and buy yourself a friend, and justify every person," and all this is preparation for the adhesion with the Creator. Naturally, the teacher does not need the compliments that a student needs. But the student needs to prepare himself for the revelation of the Creator.


text:
Q: String serialization unit test failed After running a Junit test for String serialization, it is failed and gave me the following results:
Expected: "netmodel"
Actual: "l"
The serialize method as follows
public static void serializeString(String objectToSerialize, OutputStream outputStream) {
    byte[] bytesArr = objectToSerialize.getBytes();
    serializeInt(bytesArr.length, outputStream);
    try {

        outputStream.write(bytesArr);
    } catch (IOException e) {
        e.printStackTrace();
    }
}

And my deserialize method as follows
public static String deserializeString(InputStream inputStream) {
String deserializeObject = "";
char asciiToChar;
int stringByteArrayLength = deserializeInt(inputStream);
byte[] databytesArr = new byte[stringByteArrayLength];

try {
  inputStream.read(databytesArr, 0, stringByteArrayLength);
}
catch (IOException e) {
  e.printStackTrace();
}

for (int i = 0; i < databytesArr.length; i++) {
  asciiToChar = (char) databytesArr[i];
  deserializeObject = "" + Character.toString(asciiToChar);
}
return deserializeObject;
}

Finally, I wrote a unit test as follows
public class StringSerializerTest {

  private InputStream iStream;
  private ByteArrayOutputStream oStream;

  @Before
  public void init() {
    oStream = new ByteArrayOutputStream();
  }

  String serialzeAndDeserializeObject(String stringValue) {
    OutputStreamUtil.serializeString(stringValue, oStream);
    iStream = new ByteArrayInputStream(oStream.toByteArray());
    return InputStreamUtil.deserializeString(iStream);
  }

  @Test
  public void equals_equal() {
    String stringValue = "netmodel";
    String deserializedStringValue = serialzeAndDeserializeObject(stringValue);
    assertThat(deserializedStringValue).isEqualTo(stringValue);
  }
}

what was wrong? and how to fix it?

A: You are reassigning the entire value of deserializeObject during each iteration of
for (int i = 0; i < databytesArr.length; i++) {
    asciiToChar = (char) databytesArr[i];
    deserializeObject = "" + Character.toString(asciiToChar);
}

This results in only the last character (l in this case) being stored in deserializeObject. This loop should append the next character to the deserializeObject as in the following:
for (int i = 0; i < databytesArr.length; i++) {
    asciiToChar = (char) databytesArr[i];
    deserializeObject += Character.toString(asciiToChar);
}

The corrected deserialization logic would be:
public static String deserializeString(InputStream inputStream) {
    String deserializeObject = "";
    char asciiToChar;
    int stringByteArrayLength = deserializeInt(inputStream);
    byte[] databytesArr = new byte[stringByteArrayLength];

    try {
        inputStream.read(databytesArr, 0, stringByteArrayLength);
    }
    catch (IOException e) {
        e.printStackTrace();
    }

    for (int i = 0; i < databytesArr.length; i++) {
        asciiToChar = (char) databytesArr[i];
        deserializeObject += Character.toString(asciiToChar);
    }
    return deserializeObject;
}

A: The error was already reported by Justin Albano.
However take also care of strings with non-ASCII: like special characters.
Something like the following. Also one should close at the end to ensure flushing in case of a buffered stream. And theoretically a read could yield only a non-blocking part of the array. DataOutputStream has nice methods, though you seem to roll your own serialisation.
public static void serializeString(String objectToSerialize, OutputStream outputStream)
        throws IOException {
    byte[] bytesArr = objectToSerialize.getBytes(StandardCharsets.UTF_8);
    serializeInt(bytesArr.length, outputStream);
    outputStream.write(bytesArr);
}

public static String deserializeString(InputStream inputStream)
        throws IOException {
    int stringByteArrayLength = deserializeInt(inputStream);
    byte[] databytesArr = new byte[stringByteArrayLength];
    readFully(inputStream, databytesArr);
    return new String(databytesArr, StandardCharsets.UTF_8);
}

private static void readFully(InputStream inputStream, byte[] bytes) throws IOException {
    int i = 0;
    while (i < bytes.length) {
        int nread = inputStream.read(bytes, i, bytes.length - i);
        if (nread <= 0) {
            throw new IOException("Premature EOF");
        }
        i += nread;
    }
}

Mind that StandardCharsets is not in Android SDK, only standard Java.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Shop Garmin Watches at Princeton Watches – Tagged "Band Material_Leather"
Have your next workout covered and beat yesterday with the Garmin collection of premium multisport GPS watches. No matter what your sport or fitness level, Garmin has a model to meet your needs with features such as Elevate wrist heart rate, advanced fitness features, activity profiles, interchangeable bands, and apps and widgets to customize your device. Find your next workout companion in one of the four series: Fenix, Quatix, Approach, Forerunner, Descent, and Charlie.


MONROE — Clinging to a one-run lead in the top of the seventh with a man on second and nobody out Saturday, Monroe reliever Jack Rose spun and fired to second, picking off the runner and ending the Darien/New Canaan threat.
Rose, who walked two in the inning, battled back to close out the first round of the 19U American Legion state tournament with a 2-1 victory at Masuk High School. Monroe, the 12th seed, will face No. 20 Middletown Sunday at 1 p.m. at Masuk High. Middletown upset fifth-ranked Trumbull 7-5 Saturday.
The pickoff was a microcosm of the contest, as D/NC made mistake after mistake on the basepaths, from getting picked off (three times) to not sliding twice, resulting in outs.
Weiss and Rose combined to allow just three hits. The duo did walk seven, but D/NC was unable to capitalize, largely due to its own woes.
Both of Monroe's runs were scored by shortstop Joe Porricelli, who doubled in the first and later scored on an error. His second run came in the third, and he did it with his legs — reaching on an error, stealing second and advancing to third and then scoring on two wild pitches.
Darien/New Canaan's biggest threat came in the sixth, after three walks loaded the bases for Arthur Xanthos.
After Monroe brought in Rose, Xanthos greeted him with a perfectly executed suicide squeeze to cut the deficit to one, but Rose battled back to strike out the next batter and end the threat.
Schofield also called for a double-steal earlier in the sixth that was successful, as he tried everything he could to scratch out a run in what turned out to be his team's final game.
Despite surviving with a win, Pagel hopes his team can deliver a better performance as the tournament gets deeper.
Batteries: DNC—Nick Walter (4, L), Michael Svagdis and Arthur Xanthos; M—Tyler Weiss (51/3, W), Jack Rose (S) and Brian Duignan. Highlights: DNC—Jamie Schofield reached base all four times he batted and scored the only run. M—Tyler Weiss threw 51/3 innings of one-run ball. Joe Porricelli doubled and scored both runs.


Scanning for skin cancer may have just got a lot cheaper. The Skan device – created by students from McMaster University in Canada – scans for melanomas using heat, and looks likely to slash the cost of the procedure.
Melanomas – as cancerous cells – have a higher metabolic rate than normal cells. One effect of this is that they release more heat. By introducing thermal shock by way of an ice pack to an area, and then measuring to see if any areas heat back up significantly quicker, the Skan device can detect the presence of cancerous cells.


text:
We use cookies on our website. By using our website you consent to this. Please see our Cookie Policy for more information and for details about how to remove cookies.
Globally connected
Addleshaw Goddard offers a full range of legal services in all major jurisdictions and economic centres worldwide.
Click below or choose a region on the map to find out more.
Africa is a global economic bright spot, providing exceptional opportunities for growth, innovation and expansion. Our experience spans work in energy and resources to the rapid emergence of the middle-class consumer market covering food and drink, retail, financial services and telecommunications.
The Americas offer a rich variety of business development opportunities and challenges and our experts have many years' experience across the continent.
We have a substantial presence in the fastest growing economic region in the world advising an enviable portfolio of local Asian clients and international corporates.
Key locations:
As well as our UK and Germany offices we have close, well established, working relationships with leading independent full service firms.
The GCC
Our GCC presence comprises offices in Dubai, Oman and Qatar and our lawyers are all long-term residents in the region.
AG Worldwide
Where we don't have offices we combine with like-minded correspondent firms to deliver an international capability in all major jurisdictions and economic centres worldwide.
Intelligent Delivery
AG Consulting
AG Integrate
The Digital Journey
Downstream Energy
Energy Market Regulation
Financial Services at AG: Enabling you to succeed
Healthcare Infrastructure and Public Sector
Private Health Providers, Operators and Insurers
Retirement Living and Social Care
FMCG Manufacturing
Paper, Packaging and Printing
Real Estate - Retail
Client Community Hub
Restaurants, Bars and Pubs
Business Support and Restructuring
IS and Technology
Antitrust Investigations and Dawn Raids
Competition Compliance and Advisory
Competition Disputes
EU State Aid
Market Investigations
Financial Services Transactions
Extradition and Mutual Legal Assistance
Civil Fraud and Corporate Crime
Commercial Debt and Asset Recovery
Finance Disputes
Hedge Fund Disputes
Insurance Policyholder Disputes
IT Disputes
Litigation Finance
Pensions Disputes
Procurement Challenge
Public Law and Judicial Review
Regulatory Investigations and Enforcement
Reinsurance Disputes
Reputation and Information Protection
Employment and Incentives
Immigration and International Mobility
Asset Based Lending, Trade and Supply Chain Finance
Asset Finance and Leasing
Finance for Professional Practices
Funds Finance
Hotel Finance
Social Housing Finance
Specialty Finance
Building Societies and Mutuals
Regulated Lending and Banking
Regulatory Risk and Compliance
Funds and Indirect Real Estate
Infrastructure Projects and Energy
Aviation and Airports
Economic Infrastructure
Infrastructure Asset Management
Regeneration and Inward Investment
IP Acquisition and Commercialisation
Trade Mark Portfolio Management
Pension and Life Assurance Trustee Services
Pension Products: SIPP, SSAS, EFRBS and QROPS
Public Sector Pension Issues
Trustee Advice
Charities and Not for Profit Organisations
Contentious Trusts and Estates
Powers of Attorney (EPAs and LPAs)
Probate and Estates
Tax and Succession Planning
Public Sector and Local Government
Education Sector Finance
Transaction Services Team
Our cross-border experience
Brexit and Dispute Resolution - Intellectual Property Disputes
Insights & briefings
Brexit insights
BrexLit Bulletin 2
Over time, intellectual property (IP) law in the EU has become increasingly harmonised, with the aim of making it easier for businesses to trade across the EU member states. As a result, many UK IP laws incorporate elements from legislation passed at the EU level.
An exit from the EU by the UK would raise a variety of detailed technical questions about what would happen to those laws. The answers will depend partly on any trade negotiations between the UK and the EU.
At this stage, we cannot promise to predict what the outcome will be. We can, however, share with you our insights on the immediate practical implications, and suggest some steps that your businesses may wish to take now in light of the current uncertainty.
The EUTM is a single trade mark that covers the entirety of the EU. If the UK leaves the EU, it is possible that there will ultimately be a mechanism for converting an EUTM into a UK trade mark, but it may be a while before we know for certain.
Given the current uncertainty, if you are currently developing a brand, or preparing for a new product launch it would be wise to consider seeking a UK trade mark alongside an EUTM.
For key brands, if you currently only have the protection of an EUTM, consider applying for a separate UKTM now.
Consider your trade mark portfolio – any EUTMs that are only used in the UK will become vulnerable to revocation for non-use.
Protecting designs
A Registered Community Design (RCD) protects a design across the EU. Both the UK and EU have laws to protect designs which have not been registered. However, the UK unregistered design right protects a narrower class of designs than Community unregistered design right.
Consider seeking a UK Registered Design for any designs that are currently only protected by an RCD (provided that those designs have been available for less than 12 months).
Seek advice on whether new designs could be protected as a UK Registered Design and/or if existing designs are still within the 12 month period for registration.
Taking action against infringers
Currently, UK rights owners can take advantage of the EU-wide regime for enforcing their rights against infringers and the same remedies are available across the EU. Most importantly, businesses can seek an injunction to stop infringement in other EU countries. As with so many other things, we simply cannot predict whether this regime will still be available if the UK leaves the EU.
Businesses who are currently considering taking action against EU wide infringers may wish to do so now.
Licensing arrangements
Whether licensing agreements are affected by Brexit will depend upon the specific terms agreed. Existing licences that are governed by English law will continue to be interpreted in accordance with English contract law principles. The central principle is that the court will attempt to assess the intention of the parties at the time they entered into the contract.
Of course, except for very recent contracts, it is unlikely the parties considered the possibility of Brexit at all. This leaves room for future disagreement between parties on the effect that Brexit will have on the licence terms. A safer approach would be for licensees and licensors to agree now on amendments to ongoing licences, and we suggest that key licensing agreements are reviewed with that aim in mind.
Relevant terms include:
The "EU" as the defined territory: here, the detail of how this is written in the agreement is relevant. If it describes the EU as including member states "from time to time" or "for the time being", it is likely that – post Brexit – the UK would no longer be in the contractual territory. By contrast, if the EU is defined as being "at the date of this agreement" then the UK will be included if the agreement pre-dates Brexit. If none of these phrases are used, then working out what the parties intended may become more relevant (and potentially controversial).
Royalties: this is likely to be linked to the question of territory. In particular, the UK leaving the EU could affect the commercial basis of the arrangement. Clauses dealing with royalties payments may anticipate this.
Force majeure: these provisions aim to set out the consequences of an unforeseen event. It is possible that a force majeure provision could be written in such a way as to include Brexit (even though Brexit is not specifically referenced). If triggered, this could give a party the right to suspend or terminate the agreement.
Jurisdiction & dispute resolution: typically, licensing arrangements specify that the English courts have non-exclusive jurisdiction, with the aim that rights owners can enforce their rights outside the UK, if that is where the infringement is happening. This could become even more important if the UK loses the benefit of pan-EU enforcement (see our earlier comments on this). Arbitration remains an option for the resolution of all IP disputes. This regime would be unaffected by Brexit as it is governed by an entirely separate body of law. However, there are disadvantages: arbitral decisions can be difficult to challenge and the arbitrability of IP disputes varies from country to country. Typically, the validity of an IP right cannot be arbitrated.
Review key licence agreements now to assess the impact of Brexit, focussing on territorial extent, jurisdiction, dispute resolution, termination rights and force majeure.
Consider agreeing contract variations with the licensee/licensor in order to remove any potential uncertainty of the effect that Brexit could have on the licence terms.
Settlement & co-existence agreements
The issues described above in the context of licensing arrangements also apply to settlement and co-existence agreements.
Review key settlement and co-existence agreements now to assess the impact of Brexit, focussing on territorial extent, jurisdiction, royalties, dispute resolution, termination rights and force majeure.
In some areas, it is simply too soon to predict what the effect of Brexit might be. For example:
The Unitary Patent – at the time of the UK's Brexit referendum, the EU was making progress on the introduction of an EU-wide patent right. If the UK leaves the EU, will the EU continue with this project, but without the UK's involvement?
Exhaustion of rights – if the UK leaves the EU, will owners of UK Trade Marks be able to use their rights to stop parallel imports from the EU (and beyond)?
Trade Secrets – the EU has recently sought to harmonise the law on trade secrets. As things stand, the UK must implement this law into UK law by May 2018. Will this happen?
Download the PDF version of the bulletin
Please get in touch if you require any further advice or have any questions relating to the above.
Emma Armitage
Partner, Dispute Resolution, Intellectual Property
Email Emma
Related specialisms
Related bulletins
BrexLit Bulletin 1: Contract terms
There are disputes related issues which businesses need to be thinking about now, despite the uncertainty as to how things will ultimately pan out. This note looks at the immediate implications for contract terms, from a disputes perspective, whether in the context of reviewing your current contracts or negotiating new ones.
Read the bulletin
BrexLit Bulletin 3: The EU Perspective
This bulletin highlights some of the disputes related issues which EU businesses and their advisers need to be thinking about now, in light of the UK referendum result, despite the uncertainty as to how matters will ultimately pan out.
Uncertain times require resilience and preparation.
We at AG are here to help.
Corporate Finance News - July 2019
Transport Update - June 2019
Resolve - litigation newsletter - Spring 2019
View all Brexit insights
Receive Brexit insights and updates via email.
Submit your details
©2019 Addleshaw Goddard LLP - all rights reserved.


text:
Viewing: Entrepreneurship - View all posts
GOLDMAN SACHS UPS INDUSTRY FORECAST – SAYS 1.15BN PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR MUSIC STREAMING BY 2030
SEE Goldman Sachs' Music In The Air Report Here
Guest Post By BY TIM INGHAM
The last time Goldman Sachs issued a report on the recorded music industry, it caused a wave of fiscal confidence in and around the global business.
The investment bank's 'Music In The Air' dossier, from August 2017, forecast a booming future for record labels, and set in motion a series of escalating valuations for Universal Music Group which have since hit $50bn (in the case of JP Morgan).
In that report, Goldman forecast that trade revenues from paid streaming would reach $28bn by the year 2030, with the overall recorded music industry pulling in a whopping $41bn in the same 12 months.
To put Goldman's optimism in context: according to IFPI data, in 2018, the recorded music industry generated $19.1bn globally – of which 37% (circa $7bn) was derived from paid streaming services.
Today (June 5), Goldman has issued an update to 'Music In The Air' – obtained by MBW – in which it raises its forecasts for the years ahead.
Goldman now predicts that, by 2030, the global recorded music industry will be pulling in $45bn annually (up on a restated prior forecast of $44bn).
It also believes that paid streaming will generate $27.5bn for labels and artists in that year (up on a restated prior forecast of $27.1bn), and that the overall annual global trade streaming revenues (including ad-funded) will reach $37.2bn.
Perhaps the most exciting prediction within Goldman's figures, however, is its forecast for the number of paying music streaming subscribers around the world.
The financial firm now believes that, in 2023, this stat will rise to 690m (up on a previous forecast of 528m) – more than double the number of users of paid music streaming accounts (255m) confirmed by the IFPI for 2018.
Goldman further predicts that, in 2030, there will be 1.15bn paying streaming subscribers globally (up on a previous forecast of 901m).
Within this 1.15bn number, Goldman believes that over two thirds of subscribers (68%) will come from 'emerging markets', rather than 'established markets'.
Partly as a result of that growth in emerging markets, Goldman predicts that global annual ARPU (Average Revenue Per paying User) from music streaming services will continue to fall significantly, down from $32.70 in 2018 to $27.30 in 2023 and $24.60in 2030.
It notes a current valuation for Universal Music Group of €25.1bn – €35.2bn (approx $28bn – $40bn).
Goldman's 'Music In The Air' update also predicts that, in 2030, Spotify will remain the global market leader in audio subscription streaming, with 32% market share of global streaming subscribers, down from the 38% it registered in 2018.
The timing of Goldman's new report is certainly good news for Universal Music Group owner Vivendi – which is looking to sell up to 50% of UMG this year.
A recent report from Bloomberg suggested that UMG had held talks with Tencent over a potential deal, but that some in the investment community were growing impatient.
It quoted one source as saying that "some private equity investors balk at the high price [of UMG] and slow pace of the deal".
Potential buyers for Universal Music Group mooted to date have included Tencent, Alibaba, KKR, Apple, Verizon, Amazon and Liberty Media.
in Music Business, Music Education, Entrepreneurship
21st Century Marketing 101: Reach is overrated
I received a timely email from Seth Godin this morning and want to share it with you. (No, Seth and I are not BFFs. I chose to be on his daily mailing list because, when it comes to marketing and a number of other topics, he "gets it!"
So I'm sharing Seth's brief words of wisdom. Enjoy!
Reach is overrated
From Seth Godin
It might be the biggest misconception in all of advertising.
The Super Bowl has reach.
Google has reach.
Radio has reach.
Why do you care if you can, for more money, reach more people?
Why wouldn't it make more sense to reach the right people instead?
To pick an absurd example, you can use a giant radio telescope to beam messages to the billions or trillions of aliens that live in other solar systems. Worth it?
I read an overview that pointed out that one of the cons of Amazon advertising was that they didn't have the reach of Google.
This is wrong in so many ways.
Reach doesn't matter, because your job isn't to interrupt people on other planets, with other interests. Your job is to interact with people who care.
Running an ad on the most popular podcast isn't smart if the most popular podcast reaches people who don't care about you.
Perhaps it makes sense to pay extra to reach precisely the right people. It never makes sense to pay extra to reach more people.
in Music Business, Music Education, Marketing, Community, Entrepreneurship
8 Important Web Resources Designed For Musicians
As social media promotion becomes increasingly difficult for artists to to do for free, band websites have now become one the most important marketing resources you have. That said, maintaining and customizing a website can be touch trickier than social media platforms - luckily there are a number of great resources out there designed specifically to help artists do just that.
Guest post by Patrick McGuire of Soundfly's Flypaper
With social media promotion becoming trickier and harder to do for free, band websites are more important now than ever. From selling merch with no middleman to promoting a new release and upping your SEO game, personalized music websitesare crucial in helping get the job done right. But how exactly do you "personalize" a website? Social media platforms are great for promotion because they're so easy to use, but websites are much tricker to customize and update.
To help you navigate the vast world of music-related website resources out there, we picked out eight of our favorite web tools that are made specifically for musicians, so you know you're in good hands with each of them.
1. Bandzoogle
If you're like me and want to quickly maintain and update a solid website for your band so you can get back to making music ASAP, check out Bandzoogle. They're a website-building platform built by and for musicians. For a low subscription fee, they offer tools to help musicians build great websites in minutes. They also give artists access to commission-free merch, ticket, and download sales through their online store feature.
In fact, we like this service so much that we partnered with them to make a free online course called How to Create a Killer Musician Website. Check it out!
2. Spotify Artist Insights
Streaming platforms have long been a source of controversy because of how little they pay artists, but some offer other advantages. Spotify's Artist Insights feature is a powerful analytics tool designed to help musicians understand who's listening to their music the most over the platform. It tracks listener information like gender, age, location, and through what source someone discovered your music.
How does this relate to your own website? By discovering detailed information about your listeners, you can tailor the content on your website to better reach the parts of your audience that are most engaged and likely to buy your merch, see your live shows, and check out your new releases.
3. Bandsintown
Bandsintown offers a set of high-powered tools aimed at helping musicians promote shows, engage fans, and upload videos. Their events widget is designed to sync up show listing information across the web, so adding it to your site will help your fans stay up to date with accurate information about your performances. Show announcements can be automated and sent out through their platform, which is also a big plus. But Bandsintown's biggest advantage comes with their comprehensive show listing page, which shows fans which artists are playing shows near them, in case you wanted to pitch your band for a support spot!
4. GigMailz
GigMailz is similar to Mailchimp, but is geared towards musicians and other entertainers. For a low monthly subscription, users get services like a 45-minute design consultation, unlimited lists, and analytics. By adding the GigMailz widget to your website, you can bring new fans into the fold with show and music release updates, sales on merch, and other band happenings, with a few clicks.
5. Songkick
If you're looking for an easy way to post show information in one place and have it show up all over the internet, look no further than Songkick's Tourbox API feature. It functions through a widget that you can add to your website and across your social media accounts, as well as a mass automated updater that reaches Spotify, Shazam, Bandcamp, Pandora, Hype Machine, and loads of other sites. Fans with the Songkick app installed on their phones will receive notifications when you announce shows near their location.
6. Bandtraq
Bandtraq, another company formed by musicians, creates digital tools to help artists and fans alike. The musician-oriented tools they offer include a handy customizable widget that lets artists present social media feeds, videos, music, and more, all in one place. The unique Bandlink feature helps bands design smart landing pages to promote and present new releases through a single short link, which is ideal for rolling out new music over a website in a quick and easy way.
7. SoundCloud
You're probably well aware of SoundCloud by now, but its widget feature is worth mentioning. Because SoundCloud is completely free and typically reliable, it's the perfect place to host music over your site. Yes, you'll lose some royalty money by not linking up to your Spotify or Apple Music account, but going with SoundCloud is the best option because it doesn't force those visiting your site to sign up with yet another service. Plus, it's essentially social media for track releases.
8. Metablocks Widgets
For musicians looking to integrate sophisticated retail capabilities with their sites, Metablocks is a good option. Through their widgets, you can sell music, accept email addresses, and even integrate Spotify's Pre-Save campaigns. They're able to link with hundreds of music retailers, and offer analytics in real-time about who's clicking, when, and why.
Bonus: Google Analytics
And for a bonus, because it's not strictly designed for musicians, Google Analytics is worth checking out if you're obsessed with learning more about the fans who visit your website. This platform is designed to help businesses (if you sell music, then you're a business) better understand and serve their customers, and that makes it perfect for you.
in Music Business, Music Education, Marketing, Community, Entrepreneurship, Creativity
Your Network IS your Net-Worth
Music industry veteran, Bob Lefsetz shared about the essential nature of building and nurturing a fan community in his blog this week. i can't agree more with his insight. Building, engaging, and nurturing community is central to my messages to my clients and my students. Enjoy Bob's post below.
You've got to build it from scratch.
And you have to know each and every member and how to reach them.
Remember the MTV era? Instant heroes who soon became zeros. The faster you make it, the faster you lose it.
In other words, if you're depending on the label, the corporation, to bring you to the top, you're in trouble.
I know this is antithetical to everything you've been taught, but the mentality of the music business exists in the twentieth century, while we're living in the twenty first. Grass roots. Credibility. Honesty. All these things are going to grow your career in today's era, and it's gonna happen slowly. You might never break through to the big time, but your fans will support you. Fans will house you, promote you and give you all their money. All they want in return is respect and access. It's the best deal in history. One e-mail, one tweet can motivate them into taking action.
No candidate is better known than Joe Biden. But he's living in the last century, he had no mailing list, except for the one from when he ran for Vice President, and they say those mailing lists are only good for two years.
Biden said he raised $6.3 million in his first day of fundraising, more than Bernie's first day, which netted the Vermont Senator $5.9 million.
But the devil is in the details. Biden raised the money from 97,000 donors. Bernie raised his cash from 225,000. It's about fans, not grosses. Which is why you'll see big bands limiting ticket prices, selling tickets to fan clubs, doing everything to maintain their base which will sustain them through the thin times.
Furthermore, Biden got $700,000 from fat cats, at a fundraiser. And in today's era, all the little people hate the big people.
It's happening in music too, it's just that the big people don't want you to know it. The imprimatur of the label, the push at radio, these are things the true fans have no sympathy for. The labels and radio are in the hits business, the fans are in the career business, and there's so much more money in that.
The press is behind Biden. As are the corporate donors, lobbyists and the Party. You'd think he's a winner until you look at the actual voters. This is how the Republican fat cats lost control of their party, when Trump swooped in and appealed to the little people who felt ignored.
A big publicity campaign won't tell you who you're reaching, won't give you hardly any information at all. And today it's all about the data. Spotify will tell you where you're hot and where you're not. But even more important is the rank and file, the fans. They want to hear from you, but with so many media messages your effort gets lost and stops before it reaches them. No one catches everything, it's impossible. Even the biggest of publicity campaigns don't reach everyone.
It's all about targets. Efficiency.
And there's a nerd in your fanbase who will coordinate all this. Someone savvy, who'll do it for the love.
You've got to be organized, you're managing yourself. If you're handing off responsibility to someone else, you're missing the point. Fans want you, and they can tell when it's fake.
Of course it's a lot of hard work, but the dividends are paid in the future.
Bernie could only raise this much money because he ran in 2016, he had an infrastructure.
The era of the vapid instant superstar is done. It only resonates with the media and the brain dead. True fans want to feel like they belong, they want to channel their energy, they want to know they're important.
So we've got two music businesses today. Actually three.
One is the oldsters who made it before the internet coasting on their hits, never to have another one.
Number two is the Spotify wonders. Propped up by the machine. Hyped. Sure, some of them will sustain, but most of them will not. Come on, you know that fans want to own the act themselves before everybody else does, they want to say they were there first, they don't want to be a number, they want to be known. They want to say they saw you in a club. That they bought a t-shirt from you at the merch table. And when you break through, they'll still support you.
Number three is the vast majority. Those who the machine doesn't want. Those who do not rap or sing pop to an 808 beat. Their time is coming. Stop bitching about recording revenue, everybody can hear your music essentially for free, that's a good thing! You used to have to depend on radio and sales for traction, now your music is just a click away and there are so many ways to monetize, be encouraged, not discouraged.
The media can't cope with numerous genres. It's all about winners. But in the internet era there are tons of winners. And the more different you are from the hitmakers, the greater the chances that you'll succeed.
But it's a slower process than before.
And you have to do most of the work yourself.
But your fanbase will support you through thick and thin. And no one is as rabid as a fan in spreading the word, they'll drag friends to a gig, which is why you've got to be great every night even if there are only ten people in the audience, because one person today has more power than any newspaper if they believe.
The world has become inverted. We're going from the macro to the micro. And the truth is there's plenty of money in the micro. And if you hang in there long enough, you can go macro. The machine is throwing things against the wall. You're making music containing your heart and soul, humanity emanates from the grooves, it's not for the good times, but for all time.
The old game is dying.
You're in charge of the new game. But you must use the new game paradigm. And that starts with ones and twos, fans. Know who they are and activate them, it's the only way to win in the music game today.
If you want to sell perfume and have a clothing line that's a different path.
But if you're a musician, your time has come.
Visit the archive: lefsetz.com/wordpress/
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: apple.co/2ndmpvp
www.twitter.com/lefsetz
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
Songwriters Urge Users To #CancelSpotify
#cancelspotify A growing group of songwriters are taking to social media to urge users to #cancelspotify in protest of the streamer's decision to challenge a US Copyright Royalty Board decision to raise streaming payments to songwriters 44% over the next 5 years.
Yesterday dozens of top songwriters called out Spotify in an an open letter that urged the streamer to reverse course: "Now, we can see the real reason for your songwriter outreach. You have used us and tried to divide us but we stand together."
While #cancelspotify is far from trending on Twitter, the campaign does appear to be gathering some momentum.
in Streaming, Entrepreneurship, Copyright, Royalties
Creativity is a Habit...
"You can always edit a bad page. You can't edit a blank page."
- Jodi Picoult
Creativity is a habit. You have to show up everyday...
in Music Business, Community, Entrepreneurship, Creativity
There Is Opportunity In Everything
Your current situation is not your final destination.
There Is Opportunity In Everything.
Let this be the thought that wakes you up so early in the morning.
in Music Business, Music Education, Community, Entrepreneurship
Finding Your Passion
If you struggle with the question, "What are you passionate about?" you're in much better (and much bigger) company than you probably realize.
When I was younger, I thought I was passionate about a lot of things – music, movies, faith, girls, Star Trek...
But in reality what I was truly passionate about was just feelingpassionate. Once the flame died, on to the next fire I'd move.
It's tempting to rely on Hollywood's romantic formula for defining what it means to be passionate about something (or someone).
And because I did this for so long, even now, when I am alone with my thoughts considering the question, "What am I passionate about?", I can still struggle to provide an answer.
Because the Hollywood formula is both backwards and incomplete.
"Dear world, offer me something I'm passionate about and I'll show up with all of my energy, effort and care!"
Where's the commitment? It's easy to show up, but without commitment it's equally as easy to walk away. Because nothing is good enough to earn your passion before you do it. Perhaps, in concept, it's worthy, but as soon as you closely examine the details, the benefits... and the pitfalls, it's easy to decide it's better to wait for a better offer. Or if you already jumped in with both feet, once your feet begin to ache (or wonder) to run off after something else.
Passion and commitment are inseparable.
But what if you reverse and complete the formula?
"Dear world, offer me a chance to contribute, and I'll commit to work on it, with focus, and once I begin to make progress, I'll become passionate about it!"
Committed activity – before passion – measures our craft and calling in terms of contribution, not in a romanticized notion of perfection. Passion comes from feeling needed, from approaching mastery, from doing work that matters.
To find your passion, commit yourself to doing work that matters. Contribute to the best interest of someone and something else. And feel the rush of being needed, wanted, and trusted.
in Music Education, Community, Entrepreneurship
« First ‹ Prev 1 2 Next › Last »


Chris began playing cornet in Ashington Colliery Band at the age of eleven, but soon switched to the more mellow and captivating tones of the tenor horn. Following a family move to Newbiggin, Chris joined the village band, then named Lynemouth Colliery Band (formerly Lynemouth and Newbiggin).
The band were struggling but a focused effort on recruiting young brass players at the local high school revived their fortunes. The band began to compete again and soon became a strong force, winning the North East Area Fourth Section Title in 1986 and 1987 and the National CISWO championship at Blackpool in 1987. The band progressed further and later became Greggs band reaching the Championship Section under the guidance of the legend James Shepherd.
As well as the colliery band, Chris played solo horn for the Hirst Music Centre Band, the Wansbeck Youth Band, and the Northumberland County Wind Band. Youth banding in the region was strong in the 80s and Chris enjoyed notable concert performances, recordings and tours of Edinburgh and Germany. He also picked up the odd soloist and ensemble prizes along the way.
Chris quit playing in 1988 when he went to university. Travel and working abroad meant it wasn't until his fortieth birthday in 2010 that he took up playing the horn again. He joined the reformed Jayess Newbiggin in 2013 and took over the solo horn seat in 2016.
Chris loves 'Procession to the Minster' and his favourite solo is 'Sonata for Tenor Horn' by John Golland.
Winning the Area Championship in 2016 with Jayess was very special, but winning the CISWO National Championship in Blackpool in 1987 just pips it. To win anything at a national level is fantastic and seeing where the band came from in those few years made it all the more an achievement.


Hello Guys, Happy Holi Images: Are you Searching For Happy Holi Images 2019 ? Yes Then you are at the right place I shall Share Happy Holi Images you can easily Download and share Happy Holi Images HD without any hesitation.
May God spray the beautiful colours of success and prosperity over you and make this Holi a special one.
I have mixed my love and wishes for you in the colors I'll throw on you. Happy Holi my sweet heart.
चलो गएँ, नाचें और मज़ा करें सारा दिन.
भाई बुरा न मनो क्योंकि होली है!
Puranmashi Ka Chand,chand Se Uski Chandni Boli,khushion Se Bhare Sabki Jholi,mubarak Ho Apko Pyari Holi.
Cherish your memories for a long time.
Aapne dil ka haal batana chod diya,humne bhi gehrai mein jaana chod diya.Holi se pehle hi aapne nahana chod diya?Happy Holi Friend's..
Let this Holi be a memorable one!


Package: 1Uber Lyft Sticker1 Multiple Function USB-cable Package: 1Uber Lyft Sticker1 Multiple Function USB-cable Package: 1Uber Lyft Sticker1 Multiple Function USB-cable 1 Multiple Function Car Charger Adapter2 Uber Lyft Rating SignUber Lyft Sticker FEATURE: • THIS UBER LYFT LED SIGN combines all the great features you need in one product:• UBER LYFT SIGN MAKES YOUR CAR VISIBLE from far away and your customers will not miss you again. When illuminated, this signage gives your clients a beacon to spot in the most difficult conditions. • Dimension: 8.4" x 4.4"/21.4cm x 11.2cm• Weight: 8.7oz. (248 grams) • Powered by USB Inverter•Led color: 16 colors•Material:Acrylic•Placement on Vehicle: Left, Right, Front, Rear, Upper, Lower•Fix on glass by bigger&strongger suction cupsUSB-cable FEATURE:Reinforced Wiring Increased Durability Speed-up Bold Core,3A high-speed charging ,Get rid of tangle trouble harass. Uber Lyft Rating Sign FEATURE:• Dimension: 8.6" x 6.1" • Weight: 2.47oz. (70 grams) •Material: Acrylic•Placement on Vehicle: Left, Right, Front, Rear, Upper, LowerCar Charger FeatureInput: DC 12-24V Output(port1): DC 5V, 2.1A-3.1AOutput(port2): DC 5V, DC 5V, 2.1A-3.1AMax Output: 18W, 3.6A WHY DO NOT YOU HAVE A TRY?
Sterling Silver 3-D PASSENGER AIRPLANE Charm NEW Pendant Jet 925 VH13 from thousands of antique bronze, antique sliver, glass jewelry making charms on my store, buy the more the cheaper. Just search on my store. You can choose more at a time. DIY Crafting, charms design can make your craft more beautiful. Great addition to your charm and pendant beading supplies.
Specifications:Model: SD-2401Material: ABSWeight : 37gItem Name: Blind Spot MirrorColor: Black, SilverySize: 45mm * 10mmInstallation:Tea off the sticker after a small round mirror, gently affixed to the side mirror, your vision will be extended immediately and it easily solve your problem of driving unsafety.What You Get:1 x Blind Spot MirrorYour feedback and review have been our biggest motivation.Please leave your feedback & review so that we can create more practical products.
Package: 1Uber Lyft Sticker1 Multiple Function USB-cable 1 Multiple Function Car Charger Adapter2 Uber Lyft Rating SignUber Lyft Sticker FEATURE: • THIS UBER LYFT LED SIGN combines all the great features you need in one product:• UBER LYFT SIGN MAKES YOUR CAR VISIBLE from far away and your customers will not miss you again. When illuminated, this signage gives your clients a beacon to spot in the most difficult conditions. • Dimension: 8.3" x 4.1"/21.2cm x 10.5cm• Weight: 8.7oz. (248 grams) • Powered by DC 12V inverter•Material:Acrylic•Placement on Vehicle: Left, Right, Front, Rear, Upper, Lower•Fix on glass by bigger&strongger suction cupsUSB-cable FEATURE:Reinforced Wiring Increased Durability Speed-up Bold Core,3A high-speed charging ,Get rid of tangle trouble harass. Uber Lyft Rating Sign FEATURE:• Dimension: 8.6" x 6.1" • Weight: 2.47oz. (70 grams) •Material: Acrylic•Placement on Vehicle: Left, Right, Front, Rear, Upper, LowerCar Charger FeatureInput: DC 12-24VOutput(port1): DC 5V, 2.1A-3.1AOutput(port2): DC 5V, DC 5V, 2.1A-3.1AMax Output: 18W, 3.6A WHY DO NOT YOU HAVE A TRY?
Compare prices on The Glass Passenger Review at ShopPlanetUp.com – use promo codes and coupons for best offers and deals. We work hard to get you amazing deals and collect all available offers online and represent it in one place for the customers. Now our visitors can leverage benefits of big brands and heavy discounts available for that day and for famous brands.