The Consumerist

Buying Generic Doesn't Save Shoppers As Much As It Used To

2012-02-03T22:00:00Z

]]> Used to be, back in the days of yore, shoppers looking for a deal in the grocery store could go for a generic store brand item instead of the more expensive name brands. But lately the gap between those two options has been narrowing, to the point where store brands sometimes even cost more than their previously pricier counterparts.

Many consumers turned to the tactic of store brands during the recession, to the point that now, a lot of us actually prefer our generic items for the basics at the grocery store and have become loyal to those brands instead.

According to the Wall Street Journal (via Time), stores have caught on and are raising the prices of their private-label goods, to the tune of 5.3% on nonperishables and a whopping 12% for perishables. Name brand prices aren't rising at the same pace, at only 1.9% and 8% on those respective categories, but still cost on average about 29% more than generic brands.

"It's much less about value and price than it used to be," says Clarkston Consulting analyst Steve Rosenstock, who conducted a two-month study last fall across major grocery and drugstore chains to examine why shoppers buy store brands. He says 28% of his survey respondents didn't cite price as a factor in choosing store brands over name brands--loyalty and positive experiences, instead, drove their purchasing decisions.

Stores have caught on and updated their boring, bland brand labels and created more exciting, attractive packaging for their products. And they're not afraid to price those items above their name brand counterparts. For example, Target's Archer Farms line of snacks and drinks are easily recognizable and loved by customers for their pretty logos and familiar branding.

To fight back, name brands are offering more coupons, deals and discounts to woo customers back to the fold, as well as trying to bring the cost of their products down.

Who knows, if store brand prices keep rising and name brands continue to lower theirs in response, we could see a complete switcheroo, with generics on top and name brands signaling cost-efficient options.

Store Brands Step Up Their Game, and Prices [Wall Street Journal]

Why We're Now Paying More For Generic Groceries [Time.com]

Lawsuit: You Can't Charge Me With Downloading Porn Because You Can't Copyright Obscenity

2012-02-03T21:30:00Z

]]> For the first several years of the entertainment industry's crackdown on online piracy, American pornographers did very little to go after the people who filled up gigabyte after gigabyte of hard drive space with bittorrented x-rated material. But in recent years, realizing there is money to be made by merely threatening "John Doe" defendants with making their names and downloading habits public, that has begun to change. But one California woman is fighting back, claiming that the porn she didn't violate copyright laws because the porn she's accused of downloading isn't copyrightable.

First off, the plaintiff in the case says she never downloaded the particular flesh flick she's been accused of acquiring illegally. And even if she had bittorrented the movie, she says that she and others being targeted by a litigious porn company did nothing wrong in the first place.

The woman goes all the way back to the Founding Fathers for her explanation of why copyright law doesn't pertain in this case.

From the lawsuit:

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, known as the Copyright Clause, empowers the U.S. Congress "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings."

Thus, copyright is authorized only for works which promote the progress of science and the useful arts.

Horizontal Stare Decisis or Circuit law binds all courts within a particular circuit, including the court of appeals itself... "[T]he first panel to consider an issue sets the law not only for all the inferior courts in the circuit, but also future panels of the court of appeals... Once a panel resolves an issue in a precedential opinion, the matter is deemed resolved, unless overruled by the court itself sitting en banc, or by the Supreme Court" or "unless Congress changes the law.")

Early Circuit law in California held that obscene works did not promote the progress of science and the useful arts, and thus cannot be protected by copyright.

Subsequent non-en banc decisions by the Ninth Circuit failed to follow this prior circuit decision in California.

Given the absence of any subsequent en-banc Ninth Circuit decisions, Supreme Court precedent, or changes in the Constitution that copyright is authorized for works which does not promote the progress of science and the useful arts, the subsequent Ninth Circuit decisions are void and do not constitute binding precedent.

[Defendant]'s work does not promote the progress of science.

[Defendant]'s work does not promote the useful arts.

[Defendant] has judicially admitted that its work is adult pornography.

[Defendant]'s work depicts obscene material.

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that to create the work, [Defendant] and its agents and/or its employees violated laws which prohibited pimping, pandering, solicitation and prostitution, including any claims of conspiracy.

[Defendant]'s work depicts criminal acts and/or conduct.

[Defendant]'s work is not copyrightable.

She also alleges that the pornographer knowingly allowed users of bittorrent sites to post this movie and others without issuing a DMCA take-down notice, thus turning these sites into "honeypots so they could continue to log IP address[es]" of users for future litigation.

Once porn companies put a name to that IP address, it's not uncommon for them to threaten litigation that would seek six-figure penalties and result in the public knowing that defendants downloaded x-rated films. Many defendants settle for a few thousand dollars with the hope that they remain listed as "John Doe."

Is Pornography Copyrightable? [Courthouse News]

Maybe Super Bowl Ads Are Too Cheap

2012-02-03T21:30:00Z

]]> The price of a 30-second ad slot during the Super Bowl goes up every year. In 2012, ad time is going for $350,000 per spot, or $11,666.67 per second. But maybe everyone involved is looking at this wrong. Maybe the eyeballs of the nation and the free publicity that comes along with buying a slot during the game are worth more than that, and networks should truly let the market decide.

As part of a series on football for the NFL Network, the Freakonomics team examined the question and interviewed some important experts: sports business CNBC reporter Darren Rovell, Bob Parsons, CEO of regular Super Bowl advertiser GoDaddy, and the man who actually sold all of that ad time this year: Seth Winter, head of sales for NBC Sports.

The problem with the Super Bowl advertising market is that it isn't a market at all. Markets are about supply and demand, and adjusting prices as those things shift. When these ads sell, it's at a price set in advance, and they always sell out. What would a real auction look like?

Are Super Bowl Ads Too Cheap? [Freakonomics]

New Legislation Would Pad Health Insurance Coffers While Screwing Over Consumers

2012-02-03T21:15:00Z

]]> As part of the Affordable Care Act, health insurers must spend at least 80% of the money they earn from premiums on actually providing health care, with the remaining cash used to cover all administrative, advertising and payroll costs. Those insurers with plans that don't follow this ratio are soon supposed to start giving the extra money back in refunds and discounts. But new legislation introduced in the Senate this week could jeopardize this, while giving insurance companies even more money to stick in their dog pillows.

The bill, introduced by Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and co-sponsored by John Isakson of Georgia, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Nebraska's Ben Nelson, is intended "to preserve consumer and employer access to licensed independent insurance producers," by eliminating insurance broker commissions from the administrative overhead.

So under the current rules, an insurer that takes in $100 million dollars in premiums must spend $80 million on paying for health care and those broker commissions are included in the remaining $20 million.

But if this bill becomes law, those commissions -- let's just put a number of $3 million on them for this example -- would no longer be part of the equation. That would mean the insurer would only have to spend $77.6 million on health care but would now have $22.4 million to use for its own purposes.

The National Association of Insurance found that altering the rule to remove broker compensation will result in a loss of more than 60% of forthcoming rebates for consumers.

"In just a few short months insurers must pay back consumers for wasting their money on inefficient overhead and excessive profit. But this bill would just put that money back into the hands of insurance companies" said Lisa Swirsky, Policy Analyst with Consumers Union. "This is a giveaway to big insurance and a significant loss for consumers struggling to afford health insurance."

"The single biggest complaint we hear about health insurance is ever-increasing premiums," said Swirsky. "This bill erodes the biggest tool we have for reigning in insurance companies and fighting rising insurance costs."

Cablevision Sees Nothing Wrong With Month Of Super Slow Or Nonexistent Internet Service

2012-02-03T21:00:00Z

]]> Nicole is a web developer, and as such, relies on a steady and speedy connection to the Internet. That's why she shelled out around $415 in installation and fees to Cablevision for access to their 100MB "Ultra" Internet service. But in this case, that 100MB promise has been like a flickering mirage of an oasis in a very dry desert.

She writes that since the $300 installation, the Internet service has never worked, which might make one think it was installed incorrectly. Nicole says speeds are usually about 0.5MB -- so slow that Gmail recommends switching to "basic mode" -- to a max of about 60MB before dropping again. Cablevision doesn't agree that any refund is warranted, and says nothing is wrong with this situation.

I'm a web developer, and have almost lost my job because of all of this.
Yet, Cablevision refuses to refund us these massive fees after a month without a working service. We have spoken to people from their corporate office, and are constantly reassured that the service will be fixed, and that they cannot refund the $300 installation fee (which we feel we should not have to pay because, well, it wasn't installed correctly, right?) because it will be fixed.

Today was the worst. The sixth technician to come out, a Jose from the engineering department, came to our apartment today and insisted nothing was wrong with our internet (because once in a blue moon, the Internet will spike up to half of the speed we are paying for!), shouted at us, and his assistant technician stared me down in an extremely uncomfortable and misogynist way.

These technicians have just left our apartment, and now our internet is capping out at about 3MB. But Jose claimed that everything is now resolved, so we will receive no refund, our internet is still broken, and we have spent the last MONTH dealing with this, constantly staying home from work to allow the endless flow of technicians who do nothing access our apartment.

Nicole can't even leave Cablevision, as it's the only ISP in her neighborhood outside of DSL service.

This reminds us of going to the doctor with a health complaint that sort of resolves itself when you're actually in the office and you're caught being like, "But I swear, it really hurt like five minutes ago..."

Anyway, that doesn't make it any less of a real problem, and paying for a service should (ideally!) mean you actually receive that service.

Facebook Hasn't Even Gone Public And People Are Already Selling Fake Shares

2012-02-03T20:30:00Z

]]> You're all educated, gorgeous people so you are fully aware that shares in Facebook won't be publicly available for several more weeks. But that didn't stop a woman in Wisconsin from using fake stock in the website to pay for home repairs -- she even gave some to her daughter for Christmas.

When the couldn't pay a contractor for the $18,000 worth of work he'd done on her house, she told him she'd somehow managed to get her hands on $1 million in Facebook stock. So he took $18K worth of shares as payment -- and then invested another $10,000 in completely fictional stock.

"I think it's a great opportunity, it's a growing business so on and so forth," the victim said regarding his thoughts on investing in Facebook. "I'm interested in my options and investments so you don't have to work as hard and make it a lot easier money for my kids and family."

But when it all began to smell fishy -- because the mere idea of a woman who can't pay you $18,000 just happening to have $1 million worth of stock in a then-private business didn't immediately strike him as odd -- he asked the police to investigate.

As the authorities looked into the scam, they found that the woman had hoodwinked others into taking Facebook stock as payment, and that she'd gifted a bunch of it to her daughter this past holiday season.

Woman accused in Facebook stock scam: fox11online.com

Woman accused in Facebook stock scam [Fox 11]

Thanks to Anti for the tip!

Dirty Diaper Grounds Qantas Flight

2012-02-03T20:15:00Z

]]> A few years back, I had the unpleasant experience of sitting behind a baby that had vomited all over his row only an hour into a flight from San Francisco to New York. I remember wishing at the time that there would be some non-disastrous reason for the plane to have to make an early landing so I could get away from the smell. Little did I know it would only have taken a single dirty diaper.

Earlier this week, passengers on a Qantas flight across Australia from Darwin to Brisbane complained of a suspicious stench wafting about the cabin.

The commotion became so bad that the plane made an emergency landing in Mount Isa, more than 1,000 miles from its destination.

The culprit: A dirty diaper that someone had unsuccessfully attempted to flush down a plane toilet.

"Unfortunately the fumes turned out to be a very smelly nappy dumped in the fwd toilet," reads a statement from Qantas. "'Procedures dictate to land as soon as possible. [It's] very embarrassing for us all at [Qantas], but, better safe than sorry."

The UK's Daily Mail reports that a forklift was required to get passengers off the plane.

Travelers were put on to another jet and whisked away to Brisbane. However, they still had to wait for the plane with the soiled nappy to be checked and cleaned before they could get all the luggage that remained in its cargo hold.

Qantas flight grounded by a DIRTY NAPPY after passengers complain of strange smell [Daily Mail]

If You Resold A Xoom Tablet Last Year, Someone Else Might Have Your Info In Their Hands

2012-02-03T20:00:00Z

]]> Having your personal photographs, documents, emails and passwords compromised isn't always due to a hacker or a scam -- if you're one of 100 former owners of Motorola Xoom tablets resold through Woot.com last year, someone else could be holding your personal information literally in their hands.

The Chicago Tribune says around 100 out of 6,200 refurbished Xoom Wi-Fi tablets resold through the flash sale site between October and December of 2011 may still have data from their first owners on them.

For those consumers whose information may have been compromised with the resale, Motorola Mobility is offering a free two-year membership to a credit monitoring service so they can keep an eye on things. Anyone who bought and then returned a Xoom to Amazon.com, Best Buy, BJ's Wholesale, eBay, Office Max, Radio Shack, Sam's Club or Staples between March and October 2011 will get the deal by visiting motorola.com/xoomreturn.

Motorola is also advising original owners to change all their passwords to email and social media accounts. If you reset your tablet to its factory settings before returning it, or returned a Xoom outside of the seven-month time span mentioned, you and any pictures of you in that bikini on vacation should be safe.

Xooms sold on Woot.com may contain previous owners' data [Chicago Tribune]

Outback Steakhouse Manager Overreacts To Spilled Beers -- But In A Good Way

2012-02-03T19:30:02Z

]]> Most of the e-mail we get into our tip line, especially with regards to restaurants, is about rude waitstaff, awful food and uncaring managers. So it was a very pleasant surprise to hear this story from Consumerist reader Rob, whose visit to Outback Steakhouse started sourly but ended happily.

Rob and his wife had gone out to eat with his sister and her husband. And as happens in lots of restaurants, the waitress slipped while delivering drinks spilled all over the table and a little bit onto Rob's clothes.

He says the staff immediately began to clean up, and that's when the "keep the customer happy machine" kicked into gear.

Explains Rob:

The manager, who happened to be nearby, came over and immediately began apologizing. We didn't make a fuss about it. She left and returned a few minutes later, having found out that we order appetizers. She told us that there would be no charge, implied that they would pay for dessert, and asked us to talk to her if there were any other problems with our bill.

We didn't think that this spill was a big deal, and thought that just comping our Bloomin' Onion was enough for them to have gone above and beyond the call of duty. We were very impressed with the manager's efforts to make it up to us.

We ordered our food, which was satisfactory, and got dessert, which was delicious. After our waitress presented us with our bill, the manager returned with two $25 gift certificates. She even offered to pay for dry cleaning.

Hard-Up College Students Turning To Food Stamps

2012-02-03T19:15:00Z

]]> Being in college and having an empty wallet tend to go hand-in-hand. A full course load can make it difficult for students to find steady work, and in many college towns the work that's available isn't going to pay for very much. But while my fellow students were undergoing (legal) drug trials and donating whatever bodily fluid they could get a few cents for, some in the current generation of cash-strapped collegians are turning to food stamps.

Actually called, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), food stamps have long been a stable in lower-income communities where people use them to buy groceries.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, which administers the program, announced that a record 45.8 million Americans had used food stamps. And according to the deputy director of legislative affairs and communications for the Georgia Department of Human Services, a growing number of students have been enrolling in SNAP.

"If (an applicant) is working at least 20 hours per week and meets income limits, they can qualify ... and college students are eligible," she tells CBS Atlanta. "And there has been a significant increase of use in the program over recent years."

CBS gives the example of Georgia State University, where a basic meal plan can run a student around $1,700.

"I honestly got tired of paying that amount of money per semester just to eat," says a Georgia State student. "I did not even know that I was applicable for food stamps until someone told me about the site and to apply to see if I would get it... Since then, I have saved a ton of money."

Food stamps have come under scrutiny in recent years, with the fast food industry pushing for SNAP funds to be used at their eateries (currently only available in a handful of states). Additionally, some loopholes -- like the one that allows Oregon SNAP members to use funds to buy Starbucks coffee so long as it's a Starbucks in a grocery store -- have fueled opponents of the program.

Cash-Strapped Georgia College Students Turning To Food Stamps [CBS Local]

Ohio Cops Implementing "No-Refusal" DUI Weekend With Blood-Draw Warrants

2012-02-03T19:00:00Z

]]> Cops in one part of Ohio aren't going to let a simple "no" stop them from testing drivers they suspect are under the influence, calling Super Bowl weekend a "no-refusal" weekend. If you do refuse to take a breath test, police will seek what they call blood-draw warrants instead.

According to the Toledo Blade, the Wood County sheriff's office, which covers Bowling Green and Bowling Green University, and the Ohio Highway Patrol, will ask a judge for the warrants when they stop suspected impaired drivers who don't want to take a breath test from Friday to Sunday night. In Ohio, you are allowed to refuse such a test, but your driver's license is automatically suspended for a year as a result.

The no-refusal concept has been promoted by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration to reduce the number of drivers who do reduce testing, which is 38% of those pulled over in Ohio in 2005.

The American Civil Liberties Union isn't down with the blood-draw idea or other no-refusal policies, dubbing it a violation of drivers' rights against unreasonable search and seizure under the 4th Amendment.

Bowling Green's City Prosecutor Matt Reger disagrees, saying when a driver gets a license, they're implicitly agreeing to submit to a breath test. As for those blood warrants, they must show probable cause to obtain one.

"Just because we ask for it doesn't mean it has to be granted," Reger said. "There has to be probable cause. That's why we go to the judge."

Police officials added that they usually don't ask for a blood-draw warrant for first offenders, but will do so during this weekend's no-refusal implementation.

*Thanks to Phil for the tip!

Refusing DUI test not option [Toledo Blade]

Give Second Lives To Your Old Cell Phones

2012-02-03T18:30:00Z

]]> Old cell phones you've got piled up in that drawer could do some good for others. There are ample options for donating or recycling the outmoded devices.

VolunteerGuide runs down your options, suggesting senior citizen homes and women's shelters as worthy recipients. Schools can also usually benefit from the donations.

When donating your phones, try to dig up their chargers in order to make them more immediately usable. It's also wise to get rid of any photos and personal information on the devices.

There are also recycling services that will take the devices off your hands. Recyclemycellphone.org and GRC Wireless Recycling are a couple options that came up on a quick search.

Cell Phone Recycling: Donate Your Old Mobile Phone [VolunteerGuide]

At Least 35 People Ill After Drinking Raw Milk

2012-02-03T18:15:00Z

]]> Unpasteurized, aka "raw," milk is illegal to sell in a number of states because of concerns about possible pathogen contamination. Of course, those bans also tend to make raw milk a sought-after delicacy for those who believe that pasteurization has a negative effect on the taste and nutritional value of milk. But in the last few weeks, at least 35 people in four states have become ill after consuming the unpasteurized stuff.

Health officials in Pennsylvania say that the 28 known cases of campylobacter bacterial infection in that state -- along with four in Maryland, two in West Virginia, and one in New Jersey -- all appear to be linked to milk purchased from one farm in Chambersburg, PA, sometime after January 1.

That farm, one of 153 in PA licensed to sell unpasteurized milk, has voluntarily stopped production of raw milk. It also had its latest batch tested by an independent lab and claims that the test came back pathogen-free.

35 cases of illness tied to Pa. farm's raw milk [Philly.com]

20 Campylobacter Cases Now Linked to Raw Milk Dairy [Food Safety News]

Vermont Inmates Ham It Up By Sneaking A Pig Into State Police Crest Decal

2012-02-03T18:00:00Z

]]> When you've got inmates of a correctional facility manufacturing decals for state police cruisers, hilarity is practically guaranteed to ensue. Vermont prisoners got away with quite a prank, sneaking a pig into the state police crest decals that adorned two doors of 30 cruisers for the last year.

We're guessing no one in the state police was squealing with laughter over what Reuters calls, "an apparent reference to the pejorative word for police." Inmates in the print shop made one of the spots of the cow on the crest into the shape of a pig, and that decal made it past inspections and onto police cars.

State police spokeswoman Stephanie Dasaro said it's no laughing matter.

"It dishonors the memory of those past and present members, especially for those who have lost their lives in the line of duty," she said, adding that while some might find it humorous, changing out the decals on 30 cars will come at the expense of taxpayers.

A police employee spotted the prank this week, and the "source and timing" of the change, which likely happened at the print shop, are under investigation.

Yes, it is a very serious situation. But come on, a whole year of riding around with a pig on a police car door, placed there by people incarcerated by perhaps those very same authorities? Worthy of a few immature giggles.

And for those who might have trouble spotting porky, we'll help you out:

Vermont inmates hide pig in official police car decal [Reuters]