Here is Groklaw, a website devoted to the SCO v. IBM litigation.  One of IBM’s exhibits to its counterclaims has drawn 66 comments.  Its memo in opposition to discovery requests has 75 comments.  IP litigation is the Internet’s answer to college football.

Master and Commander:  J. Welch reports that there were no visible brand names on cannons, cannon balls, swords, etc.

Looney Tunes, Back in Action:  The heroes are lost in the desert.  They then see a shimmering Wal-Mart.  One character asks: “Is that a mirage or just clever product placement.?”  After stocking up on essentials in the Wal-Mart, Daffy Duck says: “It sure was nice of Wal-Mart to give us all this food, drink and clothing in exchange for us saying Wal-Mart over and over.”  Acme Products were also mentioned a lot.

Austin Powers Goldmember (saw it on Tivo):  Two men in Tokyo running from Godzilla-looking giant lizard.  1st man: Run! It’s Godzilla! 2d man : No, due to International Copyright Law, it only looks like Godzilla, but it isn’t! 1st man: Let’s run as if it were Godzilla! 2d man (winking at camera): But it isn’t Godzilla!  Both men then run away screaming.  There is also an on-going Preparation H joke.

The Wall Street Journal reports today on page W12 that the distributor of Stolichnaya had objected to the appearance of its STOLICHNAYA in the hands of a drunken Santa in Miramax’ upcoming move ‘Bad Santa’ (more Bad Santa backlash here).  A spokesperson for Allied Domecq indicated that the company’s marketing code prohibits ‘association with any situation involving abuse of our products.’

In response, the film depicts Santa holding a ‘look-alike’ bottle labeled SNOLICHNAYA.  The article reports that Allied Domecq ‘is not amused.’

The Wells Fargo/WhenU decision is a must-read for many reasons.  Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse for plaintiffs, you learn in para. 128 that a related company of plaintiff uses defendant’s complained-of service.

Pop-Up Ad distributor WhenU has defeated Wells Fargo’s motion for a preliminary injunction in the Eastern District of Michigan.  This is WhenU’s second victory, having defeated a similar motion brought by U Haul, in the Eastern District of Virginia (background here).

Wells Fargo v. WhenU.com, Case No. 03-71906 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 19 2003).

According to IcannWatch, as soon as their registries reached their two year anniversaries, the number of .INFO and .BIZ domain name registrations began decreasing, as deletions outpaced new registrations.  .INFO has crested (at least for the time being) at approximately 1,184,000 names, .BIZ at 1,055,000 names.

If you know the URLs of the five most popular .INFO and .BIZ websites, please advise.

Question for discussion raised at the recent INTA mid-Winter meeting: In view of the U.S. accession to the Madrid Protocol, U.S. Attorneys will lose filing income from non-U.S. clients who use Madrid and non-U.S. trademark agents will lose filing income from U.S. clients.  Nevertheless, applicants who receive office actions will still need to retain local counsel to respond to those actions.  The question is not whether local counsel will seek to recoup lost income by charging ‘take-on’ fees – they will.  The question is: what is and is not an appropriate rationale for such charges (and how much will be charged).

Map of Madrid courtey of Lonely Planet.

Because then I’d get into this sort of thing.