There is a section in the article about corporate blogging/bloggers in which Gillmor really takes Lyons' recent piece (Attack of the Blogs - you could possibly access it here if you were willing to pay, but I wouldn't recommend it. Forbes' decision to keep the article under lock and key only puts them at a significant disadvantage.) to task:

Giving up a certain amount of control raises many issues, including legal ones. A recent cover story in Forbes - fear-mongering about how wicked bloggers can wreck corporate reputations - raised a few fair points, but then drowned them in melodrama and wrongheaded advice. Should companies respond to what others say about them online, especially in blogs? Lies should certainly be countered with the truth. But honorable critics and observers want to get things right. Engagement and respect go further than brandishing legal threats (one of Forbes' uglier suggestions. Companies that engage in discussions outside of their own marketing machines, even when the discussion makes insiders uncomfortable, are only adding to their credibility.

In the same issue of CIO Insight, there is an article Trolling for Dollars that I thought was a nice summary of the problem with software and business process patents. Every time I read an article like this one, I don't know whether I should cry over the stupidity of people in the world or get angry about it. As Forrest Gump said, maybe "a little bit of both." One example was a patent just awarded to Amazon.com(and I buy a lot of books from Amazon, always liked them, but more and more I find myself po'ed at them over stuff like this) covering its method for "encouraging users to write reviews of products they've bought." Hmmm - I could swear I've run across a store or two in my lifetime that had some letter they received from a customer pasted to the wall for others to read. And there is always the old adage about pleasing the customer, lest they tell 10 people about their bad experience (implying they are sharing their "review" of what they bought). I'm just really confused as to how it is that "common sense prior art" does not seem to exist within the halls of the USPTO. Anyway, I would highly recommend the article to our readers.

Finally, Happy New Year to everyone!