Are Etsy Lawyers Bullying Jayne Hat Makers?

(If you're familiar with the Jayne hat controversy, skip the introduction and get right to the good stuff.)

The Jayne hat. Oh, the Jayne hat.

If you're a fan of the short-lived show Firefly, you already know what I'm talking about. If not, the shortest coherent explanation I can give is this: In one episode, Jayne Cobb, the big thug character (who secretly has a good heart) receives a hand-knitted laplander-style hat from his mother. It is brightly colored, with a pom-pom, and is fairly silly-looking and entirely inappropriate to his general demeanor -- which is what makes it perfect. Jayne loves the hat, and wears it in a climactic scene involving guns and threats of violence.

In the intervening years, the Jayne hat has become iconic for Firefly fans. "Browncoats" (Firefly fans) have been knitting the tricolor hats for about a decade. I actually own one, made for me personally as a birthday gift. You see them all over conventions; they're an instant symbol for the fanbase.

You can see where this is going. Recently, Fox, which owns the rights to Firefly, licensed a manufacturer to start selling official Jayne hats. I actually applaud that move -- why should only fans who know knitters get to show off the accessory? But, of course, it didn't stop there, and Fox (not having learned from, oh, any other decision they ever made involving the Firefly franchise) started sending cease & desist letters to online sellers of handmade Jayne hats.

Unlike most people commenting on the situation (and even most Jayne hat knitters talking about it), I actually think Fox is on pretty shaky legal ground. Despite what they would have people think, it's not at all clear that Fox has any legal right to stop people from knitting red, orange, and yellow laplanders and calling them "Jayne hats" -- and, if they can, that should give us pause. (That may be the subject of a future post, but it would take a fair bit of research to cover the topic adequately.) But let's, for the moment, suppose that they do.

There's someone in this controversy who is cutting a path even closer to the line, and even more dangerous, than Fox. It's Etsy. And it all relies on something we were never supposed to see.

The Real Beginning of the Commercial Spaceflight Era

We've been waiting for commercial spaceflight ever since the Pan Am Orion III space plane lifted Dr. Floyd to Clavius Base in 2001: A Space Odyssey. (I'll admit to having cheated and looked up the name of the base.) By 1997, commercial companies were using the Eastern Test Range regularly to test rockets. In 2004, Virgin Galactic formed with the intention of using private money to put private individuals into space. But time marched on, no one bought a ticket to space, and commercial spaceflight looked like it was always on the horizon, never getting any closer.

Pan Am won't be flying us to the moon any time soon (especially since it was shuttered in 1991), but this week we crossed the threshold into an era where commercial spaceflight exists.

At 8:35 Eastern Time on Sunday, a rocket lifted off from Cape Canaveral to bring supplies to the International Space Station. Like many missions before it, this flight, officially labeled CRS-1, will bring cargo and supplies to the space station. The difference is, this time the rocket and capsule are entirely built and operated by a commercial company.

The rocket was the SpaceX Falcon 9, and the capsule was the SpaceX Dragon. SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell had the following to say about the launch: "It's just awesome."

Yes. Yes it is.

"Hello World! It's Me, the Internet!"

Big news today for the Internet -- and for the lobbying world. A group of organizations from the "Internet infrastructure industry" announced a new policy advocacy organization, the Internet Infrastructure Coalition.  i2, as they are calling themselves, claim to "support[] those who build the nuts and bolts of the Internet". They don't define exactly what those "nuts and bolts" are, but their members list includes software-as-service, remote hosting, and spectrum organizations.

An informal browsing of their members seems to indicate that most are related to cloud computing or other remote services. I question whether this is really representative of the "Internet infrastructure" without network owners and ISPs. Regardless of what they call themselves, though, i2 has stated that they believe in a robust and growing Internet environment to encourage innovation.

The most interesting part of i2's site is the explanation of their policy positions. Most of their positions are not particularly surprising for businesses relying on the Internet for their business models. I'd like to highlight a few interesting implications of their positions, though.