Close Your Eyes Little Ones

Your at Shoppers Drug Mart with your young child and you get inline to pay for the items that you pick out,  and you see all the racks of this weeks new magazines. The magazine that catches your attention is the bright colored Cosmopolitan with the word Sex written all over the front of the magazine. 

Do you really want your child reading out loud "Have Orgasms more easily" and then asking you what that means?

This magazine promotes sex right away, and you haven't even opened the magazine yet. 

I buy this magazine every month, because it talks about things that some women may not know about, and it also has stories from its readers, that are actually pretty funny. Positive things about this magazine are that it gives advice on topics that some women may want to talk about with someone else. So Cosmo answers questions for women. It also has the thoughts of what men are thinking, and every woman would love to know the answer to that. The Negative things about this magazine are that it is a little expensive, it only comes out once a month, and it shows sex to younger audiences. Teens and pre teens see ads for sex everywhere. 

Example; commercials, magazines, news ads, ect. 

Personally, I like this magazine because I'm not one to talk about issues that might be going on, so by reading Cosmo it answers questions, and teaches you things that you will need to know in the future. It also has a lot of ads for make-up, condoms and other sex related products. 

Should Cosmo be hidden away from young children and pre-teens?

Does this magazine make the young teen pregnancy records higher?

Cosmopolitan Reviews, March 30, 2009

http://www.reviewcentre.com/reviews62147.html

Cosmopolitan February Issue 2009, March 30, 2009

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpnT_WjQJ2N3fJI9ooRW85aXg1wJTCd_heKtbY7E4w5PN8bmkbuQ1lFrP4YYcl7nEK_okuElvOPImnWMJMp-7iWbDliTi5BkCcgyKOJ3J_2UPWjJFozONnb3MAa7zFVEJHjQ9TLoJzu2Bu/s400/ali-larter-cosmopolitan-us-february-2009-cover.jpg

Whats with the pig?

Okay so I was watching TV a few days back, and I saw a commercial for Axe shampoo.
There is a pig in the commercial, I'm just not sure of why they think they need to have a pig in it.
The pig looks clean, did he use the shampoo too?
The pig also runs through garbage, is that what guys should do also?
Note the pig jumps off the top floor, is he trying to say when pigs fly?

To me, this commercial is terrible. They said "94% of girls agree dirty greasy hair on a guy is a turn off ", how can we be sure that statement is true. We don't know if they took a poll, or if they just made it up. I agree greasy hair isn't attractive, but what about the guys who do have naturally greasy hair, or the ones who keep their hair greasy for their image. They aren't going to be to happy with this commercial.

Also, Axe DOESN'T have this commercial on their website, they made a whole new website for this ad,
http://www.axehaircrisisrelief.org/

Watch this and comment on what you think of this commercial.

Song-sharing

Copyright-the exclusive right to make copies, license, and otherwise exploit a literary, musical, or artistic work, whether printed, audio, video, etc.: works granted such right by law on or after January 1, 1978, are protected for the lifetime of the author or creator and for a period of 50 years after his or her death. [1]

*Note, this case is from October 26, 2004

An Australian song-sharing website offered a board of free music downloads. This site was one of the biggest copyright cases in the world. Many international record companies have brought a $500 million lawsuit against the man who owned the site that offered links to downloadable songs.

Will this case end music piracy?
No I don’t think it will, because there are so many different downloading sites out there, like LimeWire and Kazaa. The sites have so many illegal downloads; it would cause so much drama in this world. People rely on these sites to listen to music. Some people can’t afford to buy from iTunes, or to go out and buy Cd’s so this makes it all easier.

This website wasn’t only available in Australia; it was available worldwide and was represented as one of the main sources of infringing copies of music recordings on the internet.
“The website offered a "smorgasbord of sound recordings" to the seven million individual users who visited the site each year. There were 191 million hits and more than 136 million files requested between November 2002 and October 2003” [2]

The lawyer said the website was only a search engine and was successful because it provided a “seamless transaction” by using hyperlinks. There was also a catalogue of MP3’s that could be downloaded by a click of a button.

"There are no millions of dollars stashed away anywhere, no secret garages full of Porsches and Ferraris," [3] Tony Morris, the lawyer called the legal action “absurd” and that his client had done nothing to break the copyright law. "All he has done is put in a set of pointers which link to websites around the world," Morris said. [4]

The website, set up in 1998, and was shut down late last year. “The action, launched in October 2003, is being brought by six Australian companies, including Sony and Universal, and 25 international companies.” [5] The internet providers, E-Talk and Com-Cen, and two provider employees also will be liable as hosts, but their lawyers said the providers offered "mere provision of services". [6]

Does this man who created this website, win the case or loose it?
I do not know if he has won or lost. The case was said to be finished that Friday, but there is no continuation of this case. I believe this man had won his case, because he wasn’t making money off of the website, he was just giving people links to click on and take them to sites where they can illegally download sound recordings.
So why weren’t the websites that offered the downloading feature targeted in this case?
I have no idea why they weren’t but I believe that they should have been because if it weren’t for those websites then the website leading to the others wouldn’t have existed.




[1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copyright?qsrc=2888

[2-6] Man in court over music copyright case. October 26,2004. March 7,2009.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/26/1098667724542.html