Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Pratique

Members
  • Content Count

    1,963
  • Joined

Everything posted by Pratique

  1. The EMUSTER mark has been refused by the Patent and Trademark Office for not meeting the legal requirements for a trademark (it's "merely descriptive"). It's not clear if RC will appeal this or give up. I didn't look into the others but they might not be granted either. And even if they are are granted there is no assurance that RC will even use them on its products. I think too much is read into what these trademark filings mean. But I guess it's fodder for the YouTubers.
  2. I would assume they did a search. But trademark applications are not very expensive either and they depend on the classification of the mark. Maybe the mark is in use but in a different class. In any event, it's not a patent application.
  3. They can't use if it is already trademarked. Otherwise, they don't need a trademark to use it but they can't protect the name without a trademark. This is not a patent application. It's a trademark application. When a patent application is filed, it is usually confidential for 18 months.
  4. The numbers aren't clear but we can guess. My state of New Hampshire is the only one without a mandatory seat belt law for adults. Everyone here who wears a seat belt does it because they believe it is worth doing, not because they have to do it. I don't see many not wearing seatbelts but there are studies showing that we have the lowest seatbelt utilization rate in the country. There is no question that seat belts save lives, and that states that require their use have higher utilization rates. So the logical conclusion is that requiring masks would increase the number of people who wear them. I encountered someone not too long ago who said she would only wear a mask if the government required it. Just because we don't see maskless people doesn't mean they aren't out there. It appears that a significant amount of Covid spreading is now occurring in private settings, such as parties and weddings, not at restaurants or schools or in public places where we can see it. So why not mandate it? And why are people like the mayor of Wichita being targeted for supporting mask usage? I think you are overestimating the numbers at least outside of your area.
  5. I've mentioned this before, but I had the flu many years back and it was awful. I was curled up on the floor in so much pain that I couldn't move. It hit me hard and fast. And I was much younger then. One of my colleagues at work about 20 years ago got the flu, which turned into pneumonia and sudden death. He was in his early 50s and just like that he was gone. Generally speaking, humans are genetically programmed to procreate (or as the guy making my sandwich at Subway once put it, "to keep the train rolling"). Our hardwired instinct for self-preservation is there to get us through childbearing years. After childbearing years are over nature has little use for us. That's the way it has been for 300,000 years. So the idea of using modern science and medicine to extend our lives is a pretty recent thing, and I don't think it is a natural one. In that sense I'm not surprised by the survival of the fittest theories because they are baked into our programming. One persistent problem is that some people are reacting very poorly towards officials and business owners who want to enforce mask wearing. What do you think? Why do people generally accept seat belt requirements in automobiles and airplanes but resist the masks, all done for the sake of safety? The epidemiologists are saying that if everyone wore a mask we could get thorough this until a vaccine is ready, but the lockdowns are a consequence of enough people failing to wear masks. I don't think the messages about masks and lockdowns are inconsistent.
  6. Royal Caribbean has got this all wrong. They should start printing money instead.
  7. It’s unconstitutional as to the company, not as to the customers. Just to clarify.
  8. I have made the argument here before that the no-sail order amounts to an unconstitutional taking. Although Royal Caribbean is a foreign corporation, its stock is publicly traded in the U.S. and therefore I would argue that the company is being denied due process. The federal government has the ability to impose, temporarily, emergency regulations to protect public health, but these regulations should be the least intrusive needed to do so. At some point, either the federal government will need to proceed with formal rulemaking or drop the no-sail order altogether. They could continue to restrict operations but not under emergency orders indefinitely. The longer this goes on, the more I believe it becomes appropriate for the cruise lines to go to court if they can't work this out with the CDC. The CDC can be allowed to do its job protecting the public while also complying with the constitutional demands that any regulations be promogulated according to the Administrative Procedure Act. While it is too soon to start counting chickens, if a new president is elected next month, I am hopeful that some progress will be made without getting the courts involved. But the longer this goes on, the more urgent the need becomes for the cruise lines to start fighting for some relief. Otherwise this shutdown could go on for a very long time.
  9. The text of the Scott-Rubio bill that is going nowhere is published. No funding for any of it. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/4592/text
  10. I don't think it is intended to be workable. It is a distraction. Wide-scale shutdowns are like using a hammer to swat a fly. But the opposite - using a feather to swat a fly - is no better. Targeted restrictions seem like a more workable approach. Here in N.H. we are seeing certain golf courses, restaurants, and ice rinks shutting down temporarily in response to outbreaks. But even that feels like we only reacting to the situation and not being proactive in bringing down the number of new cases. So in the meantime...? Certainly no cruising will happen if the herd immunity approach is adopted.
  11. If past behavior is any indicator, they will likely interfere with this congressional investigation too.
  12. Someone asked her if the pay was the same, or whether it was less due to the shutdown or budget cuts. So it wasn't obvious to everyone. I'm sorry for bringing it up though.
  13. Captain Kate said she is getting paid the same. She has been on Edge for over 300 days now, waiting for her relief and a long vacation. I presume it will be awhile before things settle back to the usual 10 weeks on/10 weeks off routine.
  14. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2020/10/07/future-of-cruise-ship-buffets-carnival-norwegian-royal-caribbean/3585196001/
  15. Exactly, and that’s why some of us are worried that the plan might require quarantine of the entire ship. Hopefully not.
  16. It's impossible to catch them all. Hawaii is wrestling with this too. https://www.khon2.com/coronavirus/hawaiis-arrival-testing-debate-continues-decision-expected-this-week/
  17. The Chief of Staff has confirmed the reporting. Is that enough to be fact?
  18. The market may be waiting to see if the industry sits down with the administration and what the outcome of that meeting is. A few days ago there was optimism that the no-sail order would be allowed to expire, and obviously that didn't happen so expectations have been lowered. There will be an uptick in stocks when sailing resumes and investors see a short term opportunity. Then stocks will turn down when the quarterly results come in below expectations. It's just a hunch but it seems somewhat predictable.
  19. Yes it appears that CDC was overruled but only as to the end date of the order. Everything else remains the same.
  20. It's impossible for me to predict what someone will love or hate. I will say that my parents enjoy the old folks cruises for the activities that are geared to that age group, such as lectures and concerts, and more interesting ports. Allure has limited offerings like those.
  21. The basis for extending the order is 1) "ongoing concerns" and 2) "more time needed to assess industry measures." Four weeks from now we may still not know more than we do today.
  22. I have not seen an official announcement. FWIW the NYT has reported some of the same things as Axios, that the extension is through October, but not the part about a meeting with the administration on Friday. CDC still needs to respond to the comments solicited over the summer and to approve the plans.
  23. If it goes like this then cruises will be doomed pretty quickly.
  24. There is only one fact: unless the CDC does an unlikely 180 and drops the matter entirely, the only thing holding up a return to cruising is the requirement that the cruise lines submit an acceptable plan to mitigate an outbreak. The CDC is not telling us how to cruise, they are telling the cruise lines that they will be held responsible for mitigating the risks. At that point it becomes a business decision about how to do that.
×
×
  • Create New...