What percentage of search engine users click on organic search results as opposed to the paid listings? This question was asked on a Search Engine Watch forum. unfortunately the most recent public statistics seems to be a 2004 iProspect report that states:
Google – 72.3% organic, 27.7% Paid ads
All engines – 60.5% organic, 39.5% paid ads
If you have a link for more recent stats, send it on.

IPKat on the possibly descriptive, possible disparaging mark NOT MADE IN CHINA, filed for in the EEC. The article cited by IPKat reports that the same applicant, Alvito, filed in the U.S. but was rejected. This may not be correct, as I found three pending design applications by Alvito for that mark, all of which have not yet been examined. However a different entity has filed in the U.S. for NOT MADE IN CHINA as well, and it received a preliminary geographical descriptiveness objection. Several registrations contain the words MADE IN CHINA, and have disclaimed that term.
UPDATE: TTABlog on a prior TTAB decision on NOT MADE IN FRANCE.

Wired article on Damon Wayans filing for the mark NIGGA for various goods. He has several months to respond to an office action that rejects the application on Section 2(a) ‘immoral or scanadalous matter’ grounds (well known to those following the DYKES ON BIKES matter).
The DYKES ON BIKES application was approved for publication but was recently opposed. We don’t have an (even uncitable) TTAB ruling yet on that applicant’s position. Evidence was submitted to establish that use of the terms DYKES by a lesbian social group was empowering, not disparaging. This evidence can support two related but distinct arguments:
1. The term is not disparaging if used by members of the ‘target’ group;
2. That members of target group would wish to use the term is evidence that cultural standards have evolved such that the term is no longer disparaging (for purposes of Section 2(a)).
Both statements may be true but one concern I have is the fact that terms such as DYKES and NIGGA still retain their offensive qualities when uttered by certain people in certain contexts. How to reconcile that with both arguments? Are there trademarks that can only be owned by members of ‘protected classes’? Can the PTO make determinations as to who is and who is not a member of that protected class? Can such trademarks be assignable only to people who will use the term the ‘right way’?
Is the analysis for a mark that is merely the per se term, such as NIGGA, different from a term such as DYKES ON BIKES, which is, devoid of any other context, humorous?