Vaporware

Pajamas Media has launched under a new moniker, Open Source Media, or in their officially-sanctioned shorthand OSM™. Yes, the trademark symbol is part of the abbreviation to remind people that they’re not that “open source”. And in case you get any funny ideas about freely distributing and modifying any of OSM™’s intellectual property, every page is accompanied by a copyright notice and a link to the privacy policy :

Our Site and all its contents, which includes, but is not limited to, text, graphics, photographs, logos, video and audio content, is protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under the copyright laws of the United States and other countries. All individual components of Our Site, including, without limitation, articles, content and other elements comprising Our Site are also copyrighted works. Additionally all of the weblogs linked to by us are likewise protected. You must abide by all additional copyright notices or restrictions contained on this site and our linked weblogs.

You may not reproduce, distribute, copy, publish, enter into any database, display, modify, create derivative works, transmit, or in any way exploit any part of this site. The only exceptions to this are that you may download material from Our Site for your own personal use, provided such download is limited to making one machine readable copy and/or one print copy that limited to occasional articles of personal interest only. No other use of the content of Our Site is permitted. Please contact our Sales Department if you wish to have rights other than those stated above.

As a comparison, here’s the notice at the bottom of DailyKos (who’s notably absent from OSM™’s blogroll) :

Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.

The jury may still be out on whether or not OSM™ is a thinly-disguised conservative blog circlejerk, one thing is already clear. They’re not open source. I’ve always considered the intentional misuse of buzzwords to be a MSM™ phenomenon, but the guys in pajamas sure are quick learners.


posted by greg on November 16, 2005 @ 8:54 am

67 comments

  1. The perfect organization to report on Clear Skies, Healthy Forests, Saving Social Security, Mission Accomplished, Honor and Dignity…

    Comment by NTodd — November 16, 2005 @ 11:00 am

  2. Open Sore
    ain’t it the truth.

    Comment by zennurse — November 16, 2005 @ 11:00 am

  3. Another bullshit EULA. Bluntly, it reads as if they want to claim copyright on everything, everywhere. The only thing “open” about these cretins is their skulls to the four winds.

    Comment by filkertom — November 16, 2005 @ 11:00 am

  4. isn’t the idea of having a blog, to help spread one’s words and ideas? Not severely limit the useage and spreading of them???

    Wankers. Ãœberwankers.

    Comment by renato — November 16, 2005 @ 11:03 am

  5. To be fair to them (although why I have no idea), “Open Source” was a term of art in the intel community long before the IT community adopted the same term for a different purpose.

    In intellegence work, it means merely reading things available to the public without going out and doing any real checking on it yourself. Hmm. Maybe it’s more appropriate than I thought.

    Comment by bunny — November 16, 2005 @ 11:07 am

  6. Eh - wait until the darling trolls start copying and pasting from OSM™®* onto lib blog comment threads. Think the OSaMa boys will crack down on them?

    —

    Comment by MasterD — November 16, 2005 @ 11:08 am

  7. Ãœberwankers

    best addition to the Neoconomicon since “101st Fighting Keyboardists”!

    Comment by r@d@r — November 16, 2005 @ 11:10 am

  8. Wow, they managed to rewrite US copyright law to prevent excerpts for parody, review, commentary and reporting. Amazing feat for a bunch of misfits with 3.5 million dollars to call their own.

    I wonder how that money gets spent?

    Obviously, they are planning to keep their lawyers busy enforcing their IP protection clause.

    Is it fair to use “intellectual property” when refering to what these monkeys will be banging out on their keyboards?

    Comment by Mysticdog — November 16, 2005 @ 11:14 am

  9. They may be using the phrase “open source” in the meaning used by the intelligence community, not the meaning used by programmers/intellectual property community.

    Comment by No Name No Slogan — November 16, 2005 @ 11:19 am

  10. Wait, I’m confused. Is this more strict than just the regular usage stuff? Are we not allowed to quote them if we link to what we’re quoting? Not that I’m likely to do that, but it seems odd if they’ve got stricter rights than everyone else has.

    Comment by Doctor Biobrain — November 16, 2005 @ 11:22 am

  11. Get your Pustulent Ulcerated Cranks at Open Sores Media, where necropsy is not just how we think, it’s our way of life.

    Comment by jerry — November 16, 2005 @ 11:23 am

  12. Does that mean they won’t be able to get certified?

    Comment by buermann — November 16, 2005 @ 11:23 am

  13. I went ahead and submitted their privacy policy back to them via their ‘Tip Door.’ I think it’s important they be regularly reminded to enforce it. Ack! It may have gone into a database! Oops, sorry.

    Comment by HobbesLaw — November 16, 2005 @ 11:26 am

  14. To settle this mini-debate, here’s the explanation from OSM™’s “From the founders” page :

    “Free speech, not free beer!”

    In 1985, that’s how the Free Software Foundation first described an idealized world wherein innovative ideas would flow freely though the collaborative environment of the internet. In casting about for a term that would denote freedom, not freebies, those who followed FSF coined the term “Open Source,” intending it merely as a reference to the “source” code in which they programmed. It turned out to be much more than that.

    The open source ethos helped drive the great boom in information technology that made the internet ubiquitous in the 90s and led to the creation of over 20 million personal weblogs–or blogs–in the first half of the oughts. But the term “Open Source” had a ring to it, as did the idea behind it, and the notion quickly spread, leaping to other fields. Linus Torvalds, the father of the open source operating system Linux, once said, “The future is open source everything.”

    At OSMTM (Open Source Media), we believe that to be true—that freedom, openness and transparency in media is an inevitable result of the technological advances that have given every citizen the chance breathe deeply of the news, thought and opinion that hovers in the ether between us.

    In short, they’re co-opting the ideals of the open source software movement while still making sure to cover their own asses.

    Comment by greg — November 16, 2005 @ 11:29 am

  15. Repug Fellaters Media

    Comment by Terry C — November 16, 2005 @ 11:31 am

  16. Is that legal? They basically admit that they are trying to confuse themselves with OpenSource which is trademarked by somebody else.

    I’m not a trademark lawyer, and I’m guessing the only hack of a lawyer that they have is the InstaIdiot. Do you think OpenSource is going to sue them? Or at least send them a threatening letter?

    Comment by DR — November 16, 2005 @ 11:35 am

  17. Has David Corn woken from his sweaty pajamas nightmare yet? If not, will somebody please throw a bucket of cold water on him to get him to snap out this. Hopefully it’s not a question of needing a bucket of money instead of the water.

    Comment by Bragan — November 16, 2005 @ 11:43 am

  18. There’s also “Open Source Radio”,
    http://www.radioopensource.org/

    Which has a copyright at the bottom of “Open Source (sm) is a production of Open Source Media, Inc. Contents (c) 2005 Open Source Media, Inc. ”

    They use a much more “open” license, too, more in keeping with the name.

    Comment by Airmon — November 16, 2005 @ 11:44 am

  19. I wonder who is minding their copyright p’s and q’s? They’ve failed:

    Open Source (sm) is a production of Open Source Media, Inc. Contents (c) 2005 Open Source Media, Inc.

    radioopensource.org

    Comment by renolane — November 16, 2005 @ 11:46 am

  20. Aren’t you violating their Privacy Policy by quoting their Privacy Policy?

    Comment by Bob Munck — November 16, 2005 @ 11:46 am

  21. They may be using the phrase “open source” in the meaning used by the intelligence community, not the meaning used by programmers/intellectual property community.

    Great branding approach to use something that’s ambiguous at best. But it’s pretty damn clear in the context they mean computer shit, not spook shit. Either way, it’s pathetic when you consider what blogging is all about. I guess getting $3.5M in VC really changes things in a hurry.

    I laugh.

    Comment by NTodd — November 16, 2005 @ 11:48 am

  22. You may not reproduce, distribute, copy, publish, enter into any database, display, modify, create derivative works, transmit, or in any way exploit any part of this site.

    I think all search engine providers should take them at their word on this and refrain from indexing any matieral on their site.

    Comment by sammy baby — November 16, 2005 @ 11:48 am

  23. The blogosphere is about the OPEN FLOW of information in all directions. The attempt to grab CONTROL of news blogs it totally against the spirit of what blogging is all about. I believe their business model is inherently doomed to failure.

    Comment by Ed Deevy — November 16, 2005 @ 11:57 am

  24. Based on a quick perusal of other “open source” trademarks, it appears that they have little hope in registering the mark (but this isn’t legal advice).

    Go to www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm and click on “Search Trademarks.”

    Do a freeform search with the following phrase (no quotes): “(open AND source) [comb]”

    Check out the results. Almost evey mark that attempted to use the phrase “open source” is “Dead.” (the listings at the top of “Live” marks are recently filed, so they haven’t had much of a chance to be rejected)

    If you click on TDR in the individual listing page (blue button a the top), you’ll see that many (all that I checked) were refused under section 2(e):

    “The examining attorney refuses registration on the Principal Register because the proposed mark merely describes the goods/services. Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1); TMEP §§1209 et seq.

    A mark is merely descriptive under Trademark Act Section 2(e)(1), 15 U.S.C. §1052(e)(1), if it describes an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function, feature, purpose or use of the relevant goods/services. ”

    It appears that every applicant who got one of these abandoned their application because, in fact, most used “open source” in a descriptive manner.

    Comment by A_B — November 16, 2005 @ 12:07 pm

  25. Don’t know if anyone else has noted it, but there may be an implicit pun with MSM, like traiditional media are Microsoft and blogs (of which Pyjamarama is presumably the creme de la creme) are like Linux.

    Comment by kth — November 16, 2005 @ 12:09 pm

  26. Looks like Google will be violating that EULA

    Comment by Dan Sniderman — November 16, 2005 @ 12:10 pm

  27. I think it’s conceptual art. In fact, it has been done before:

    ‘In 1998, Kembrew McLeod trademarked the phrase “Freedom of Expression” and created a zine with that title. He enlisted a friend, Brendan Love, to pose as the publisher of an imaginary punk rock magazine also called Freedom of Expression, whom he then pretended to sue. McLeod hired a lawyer and didn’t let her in on the hoax. The lawyer sent a cease-and-desist letter to Love:
    We represent Kembrew McLeod of Sunderland, Massachusetts, the owner of the federally registered trademark, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION … Your company has been using the mark Freedom of Expression …’

    http://www.illegal-art.org/print/images/freedom1.jpg

    Comment by DS — November 16, 2005 @ 12:13 pm

  28. They may be using the phrase “open source” in the meaning used by the intelligence community

    Well, that would be irony on a base level.

    Comment by ahem — November 16, 2005 @ 12:17 pm

  29. “Looks like Google will be violating that EULA”

    I hope not. This language:

    “You may not reproduce, distribute, copy, publish, enter into any database, display, modify, create derivative works, transmit, or in any way exploit any part of this site.”

    Means they won’t be showing up on search engines. Thats just fantastic!

    Comment by gr — November 16, 2005 @ 12:17 pm

  30. “Open Source Media”

    About as “open source” as Microsoft Excel, as it turns out….

    Trackback by Making Light — November 16, 2005 @ 12:23 pm

  31. “thinly-disguised conservative blog circlejerk”

    Its definitely a circle jerk.

    Comment by jerking circle — November 16, 2005 @ 12:26 pm

  32. Uh, so are bloggers supposed to link to their site without quoting anything from the site?

    Comment by jerry — November 16, 2005 @ 12:28 pm

  33. Additionally all of the weblogs linked to by us are likewise protected.

    Does that include the weblogs on the blogroll? How about those linked to in the content of a post? Have they sought consent from each of the authors so covered before placing their material under the OSM privacy and copyright policy?

    Comment by Ereshkigal — November 16, 2005 @ 12:28 pm

  34. David Corn and Marc Cooper have joined Christopher Hitchens in the “Ex-Liberals Club.”

    Comment by David Ehrenstein — November 16, 2005 @ 12:38 pm

  35. PJ MEDIA: WHAT’S IN A NAME?

    PJ Media resurfaces as OSM (short for Open Source Media). Seattle PI/AP article here. There were a few to-dos about its name and re-naming. In the end I can’t believe they went with OSM (if the article is accurate). It’s…

    Trackback by Begging To Differ — November 16, 2005 @ 12:46 pm

  36. I thought the idea of this thing to was to sell ads, yet there’s not a single ad on the site…

    Comment by jefe — November 16, 2005 @ 12:50 pm

  37. “I thought the idea of this thing to was to sell ads, yet there’s not a single ad on the site…”

    Subliminal ads?

    Comment by Laurence Simon — November 16, 2005 @ 1:01 pm

  38. I love it! http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com

    Comment by Patrick J Fitzgerald — November 16, 2005 @ 1:03 pm

  39. That’s some sense of humor, trademarking ‘open source’, then making it explicitly non-open source.

    Was this the presidents idea?

    Comment by mdhÃ¥tter — November 16, 2005 @ 1:12 pm

  40. I’m going to wait until they actually publish something before I start trashing their mercenary asses up and down the Internet. Until then, screw ‘em.

    Comment by Pope Ratzo — November 16, 2005 @ 1:37 pm

  41. I find it far more frightening, as a writer on open source, that these bozos intend to trademark the name “Open Source Media” as belonging to them and them alone.

    Is there a way to oppose such a registration on the grounds of false advertising?

    Comment by Dana Blankenhorn — November 16, 2005 @ 1:44 pm

  42. Holy crap… and I thought ‘Pajamas Media’ was bad!!

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

    wow.

    Comment by zerohundred — November 16, 2005 @ 1:45 pm

  43. It is truly sad that David Corn is lending his name and reputation to the circlejerk club. It’s really a shame.

    Comment by FastMovingCloud — November 16, 2005 @ 1:50 pm

  44. Open Source Pajamas

    The Pajamas Media (aka Open Source Media) development has been mildly interesting to watch and now I wonder whether anyone will read, analyze, quote and link to anything on that site beyond navel gazing by the participants. My reading of their copyrigh…

    Trackback by Modulator — November 16, 2005 @ 1:52 pm

  45. Of course it’s gonna be a Republican circle jerk. With Judith Miller on the masthead, how the fuck could it not be?

    JP

    Comment by jurassicpork — November 16, 2005 @ 1:57 pm

  46. More like Oozing Sore Media

    Comment by Betty Rubble — November 16, 2005 @ 2:16 pm

  47. I think they just don’t want me to use their contributor photos for captioning.

    Comment by Roxanne — November 16, 2005 @ 2:23 pm

  48. Just to inform everyone: In light of the obviously superlegal nature of the Agreement, I have just deliberately (with malice aforethought) broken the agreement in no fewer than three ways and informed the management.

    Just for the record.

    Comment by Drew Johnston — November 16, 2005 @ 2:26 pm

  49. Maybe I’ll just cut-and-paste David Colmes’ (er, Corn’s) stuff for ritual verbal abuse….

    Comment by Heywood J. — November 16, 2005 @ 2:32 pm

  50. Open Source Media - Gaza border deal

    Open Source Media™, the blogospheric news portal run by Little Green Footballs’ uber-bigot Charles Johnson, hasn’t even been up for a whole day and it’s already hating on negotiations with Palestine. Color me surprised. Keeping with the topic, Th…

    Trackback by SMEGMASTER.COM — November 16, 2005 @ 2:38 pm

  51. Very interesting find.

    I interviewed Doc Searls a while back for my open source, collaborative documentary on the pre-war failures of the mainstream media.

    I interviewed Doc about open source communities, and thought that this would be a good time to post the interview here.

    I gave you a hattip for shining a spotlight on their privacy policy.

    Comment by Kent Bye — November 16, 2005 @ 3:12 pm

  52. No Copy Rights On Our Stuff

    Please Feel Free 2 Copy
    and/or
    Use Anything On Our Web Sites U Want 2

    …Thank You, Roger Drowne EC

    1. http://www.RogerART.com

    2. http://www.OneGlobalCommunity.com

    3. http://www.TheBuffaloParty.com

    COPY AWAY MY FRIENDS

    …WE WILL ALL B DEAD SOON ENOUGH

    At 64 I’m Glad I Won’t Need This Body

    For-Ever

    Yea GOD
    .
    .

    Comment by Roger Drowne EC — November 16, 2005 @ 3:20 pm

  53. OSM Wrap-up

    We lead off with Ann Althouse’s post from earlier this year in her archives about Pajamas Media v. BlogAds and other questions: Let’s assume you’re a reasonably successful blogger who would like to make money from the writing you put…

    Trackback by Blog Network Watch — November 16, 2005 @ 5:16 pm

  54. “Pajamas Open Media” works for me. And if they have pockets in those pajamas, they can turn them inside out and make the ‘elephant’ joke, which is also wholly appropriate for these clowns.

    Comment by pseudolus — November 16, 2005 @ 5:57 pm

  55. Attention from everyone lady and man in blogosphere.

    I am russian OSM blogger Jhenechka and I am available for opportunity to blog and maybe make discussion with YOU.

    In my photograph on my interesting new OSM blog you can see that I am available and ready for maybe discussion.

    Well, if you are ready I am ready so YOU can go to my blog and we discuss whatever. Do not be afraid if I am man with copywrited opinion. OK?

    BTW..

    I know the location of the g spot. I have tried this place on myself and it is correct.

    Yes and also I did have very large amounts af hair surrounding (encompassing) my g spot.

    It is seriously jaw dropping.

    But Muska groomed my hair off with water and the spoons I am clean.

    Thank you.

    Jhenechka

    Comment by Jhenechka — November 16, 2005 @ 8:31 pm

  56. Oh.. let it go. Just read a GOOD blog…

    CLICK

    Comment by Reg — November 16, 2005 @ 9:34 pm

  57. Someone didn’t do their homework

    Pajamas Media, the folks who signed up some 300-plus bloggers for a “subversive new media” and then uncerimoniously dropped the 230-plus small-fry, publicly announced they had renamed themselves to Open Souce Media last night.
    Unfortunate…

    Trackback by Random Fate — November 16, 2005 @ 11:52 pm

  58. Once I am elevated to the court, this type of thing will be the norm.

    http://samuelalito.blogspot.com

    Comment by Samuel Alito — November 17, 2005 @ 9:53 am

  59. Not to spam a link, but it is relevant to the discussion, but I posted my thoughts about the name and licensing model.

    I’m seriously confused.

    Comment by Karl — November 17, 2005 @ 12:22 pm

  60. limitation articles content

    The Talent Show has a great post ridiculing the newly-launched right-leaning media business Open Source Media or OSM™, which collections contributions from bloggers, primarily from the conservative/authoritarian side of the political spectrum. I unders…

    Trackback by infobong.com — November 17, 2005 @ 12:56 pm

  61. OxyMORONS

    I’m not paying much attention to Pajama Media’s new moniker, Open Source Media, or OSM, but - as The Talent Show pointed out on annoucement day Wednesday - this is still the copyright notice included in their Privacy Policy found…

    Trackback by aTypical Joe: A gay New Yorker living in the rural south. — November 17, 2005 @ 9:30 pm

  62. Wingnuts + weblogs + imaginary business plan + splashy launch party = ???

    I’m not really into the whole “blogosphere” thing — I’m more into the blog-augmented* monkeysphere — so I haven’t really paid any attention to this conservative new media thing calling itself Open Source Media,…

    Trackback by Chrononautic Log — November 18, 2005 @ 12:42 pm

  63. Um, why not just pick a good term and googlebomb em?
    —
    Nice preview system :)

    Comment by AC — November 18, 2005 @ 2:46 pm

  64. Smells Like Victory III

    The news keeps getting worse for Al-Zarqawi. Not only have most of his family disowned him( hat-tip Chris Taylor) . But he appears to have been killed as well.
    At least that is the news being reported in some quarters as the US apparently had a heat…

    Trackback by The Meatriarchy — November 20, 2005 @ 5:25 pm

  65. Metro Crowded, Fed Retirement, Cold Thanksgiving, Pajamas Media

    If you’re looking for elbow room when you ride the Metro during rush hour, you may be out of luck.Metro officials say ridership is up considerably from the same time last year and the trains are only expected to get…

    Trackback by Hobnobblog — November 21, 2005 @ 3:37 am

  66. Metro Crowded, Fed Retirement, Cold Thanksgiving, Pajamas Media

    If you’re looking for elbow room when you ride the Metro during rush hour, you may be out of luck.Metro officials say ridership is up considerably from the same time last year and the trains are only expected to get…

    Trackback by Hobnobblog — November 22, 2005 @ 3:32 am

  67. A Website Media Launch ‘Revolution’ Goes FUBAR
    The Emperor has no pajamas

    The goal of our enterprise is to bring gravitas and legitimacy to the blogosphere - from a Nov. 21 OSM.org news release It’s been a long time since I laughed so hard at a sour band of fools. Last weekend…

    Trackback by Temple Stark.com — November 25, 2005 @ 3:27 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.