Love the photo.

I strongly don't want H.Clinton to be president but would never make fun of her personally or her family. It's a cute picture.

hanging around that can use it......8~}

Or there is the lesbian version of it since the right-wingers think Hillary is a lesbian.

Hillary is going to need her sense of humor. Hope it holds out!

That's adorable!

... would have been known as a dunce cap.

It went down yesterday after it got 50,000 hits on the day of Rubio's announcement of his candidacy. Apparently, his web designers didn't think he was going to get all that much attention (it'll probably be plenty durable for the number of visits it gets after, oh, say April 18). But the maraschino cherry on the news of Rubio's website crashing - besides his bragging about being a hip, new candidate that all the kidz can relate to - is that Rubio had quite a few choice words for the rollout of the Affordable Care Act website when it crashed due to the millions of people trying to log on at the same time.

That there is pretty goddam funny, too.

Or at least have a fall-over plan in case they fail.

Some content delivery network. Clinton's site is hosted on a CDN, it can scale to tens of millions of hits quite easily.

They probably looked for the cheapest hosting possible and that's that.

That you want the website to go down on its first day because that shows how popular you are. This may not be the prevailing view anymore, but I work for a place that did a pretty famous celebrity's first ever website, and he mentioned that he wouldn't mind if that happened for that reason. Unfortunately for him, we spread the load over 3 servers.

TlalocW

But when Rubio's campaign admitted that his website crashed under the load of a measly 50,000 hits, even an old fogey like me knew to chuckle at how fragile the platform was.

So they were going for wanting the site to crash for the publicity and the, "Hey, look how popular Marco is!" moment, but they didn't know you could find out how many people loading the site crashed it.

But I'm getting too far into a conspiracy theory so I"ll Occam Razor it and say, you're right.

TlalocW

Humor goes a long way with people.

This is the reality of the Internet. I can't find the energy to criticize a 404 page.

that won't materialize.

Last time around it was the guy who did understand things like the interwebz and district-level delegate wonking who won.

What strange times we live in.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

Is Donald endorsing Hillary?

Disney is EXTREMELY vigilant on copyright issues like this. The only non-Disney place that is allowed to use Donald Duck is the University of Oregon. Walt himself OKed that arrangement.

of information.

Beginning in 1940, cartoon drawings of Puddles in student publications began to resemble Donald Duck, and by 1947, Walt Disney was aware of the issue. Capitalizing on his friendship with a Disney cartoonist, Oregon athletic director Leo Harris met Disney and reached an informal handshake agreement that granted the University of Oregon permission to use Donald as its sports mascot.[1][2][4]

When Disney lawyers later questioned the agreement in the 1970s, the university produced a photo showing Harris and Disney wearing matching jackets with an Oregon Donald logo.[2][5] Relying on the photo as evidence of Disney's wishes, in 1973, both parties signed a formal agreement granting the university the right to use Donald's likeness as a symbol for (and restricted to) Oregon sports.[2] The agreement gave Disney control over where the mascot could perform and ensured that the performer inside the costume would "properly represent the Donald Duck character."[6]

In 2010, Disney and the university reached an agreement that removed the costumed Oregon Duck mascot from its association with the Donald trademark, and allowed The Duck to make more public appearances, such as at college mascot competitions.[6] The mascot in graphic art, which is more similar to Donald Duck than the rounder head and body of the costume, is still covered by the trademark agreement.[6]

I'm a balloon twister and sometimes get asked for different college mascots, and that's been one. I don't follow sports though so we had to look him up on a smartphone, and I was surprised at his resemblance to Donald and wondered how they were getting away with it.

TlalocW

Good idea, it beats the usual boring 404 standard message.

HillaryClinton.com

Starting with 405, it reads like a summary of my dating life

on various websites. Hell even DU was OOS for a long period of time.

Lots of sites do this and every website should. It's kind of lazy not to do it.

For example:

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/sdkfjsfjsklfjslfjsoenveee
Yahoo http://www.yahoo.com/sfjsofjwiofjwpfjsep
Twitter http://twitter.com/sfjsiofjhwsiofiuweweeee

Not that the Hillary one isn't cool, it is, but it's not a new idea.

So it deserves mention. But "It doesn't get much better" is perhaps a bit much.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

Any trademark claim is undermined by not being a commercial use and the fact that they not only allow but encourage their character-actors to pose with people for photographs and have promoted that park visitors upload those photos to the internet. (and why wouldn't they, it's great free advertising. "Look at the photo of how much fun we had at Disneyland" sells a lot of tickets to Disneyland.)

To sue or claim infringement, they would have to either/or/both:

a.) prove they don't allow photography with characters.

b.) go after every person in the history of WDW and Disneyland to have their picture taken with a Disney character and put the picture on the internet for any non-commercial use.

That would be a PR disaster for them that they wouldn't survive...and they'd probably lose. Further, it appears to be one of those pictures where you can pay money and have party at the park...in which case, Disney got paid for the photo to be taken and the photographer is an employee of the park. It's work-for-hire. The Clintons own the rights to it...it's not like licensing a photo for publication; they own the photo to do with what they'd like.