Btw, you have an awesome blog, and I very much enjoy reading it.

I don't really get why hackers would steal such juicy information allegedly for the public good, then tease the public with it instead of revealing everything immediately.

The question that immediately comes to my mind: If he is so fully booked for $4000 suits, why not increase the price until finding the demand wall? Perhaps by starting at $4k, and I assume being back ordered far into the future, he has cemented his brand at that price point?

Because they are holding it for ransom, apparently. They want a million dollars in bitcoins.

http://venturebeat.com/2012/09/05/romney-tax-returns-hacked/

The ransom may be from someone else, more info in a reddit comment. Most interestingly an alleged page 1 of his 2003 tax return was leaked.

e: Apparently the Williamson GOP is confirming that they have, "received a letter and a flash drive Friday allegedly containing the stolen tax records of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney."

Interesting times we are living in.

This will probably force Romney to release his records, lest this be a distraction for the rest of the campaign. If there is damage control to be done, he better start sooner than later.

If he paid less than 13%, he is in serious trouble.

EDIT: Pastebin of the note.

I was curious about this as well. I was unsure if perhaps it was a flub in the article (since it later states that demand is falling) or if it's just a bit of mismanagement by the tailor. Either way, I wonder if doubling the prices would really work, since there's the looming possibility that the increasing quality of mass-manufacturing could completely undercut him.

The issue of no scalability is a sad problem facing artisan crafts now. I wonder what will become of them as manufacturing progresses.

or If he paid less 10% tithes he could lose utah :

If an attractive woman happened to be walking down the street nude and someone raped her, that person would be a horrible monster. There is no justification for such things. Never, ever, ever. I don't care how they are dressed or what they said etc. If you force yourself upon a woman (or man), you are evil. It's that simple.

This is not ownership, this is the ability to profit off of a persona.

If you don't want people to disparage you, don't be the kind of person that people want to disparage, living or dead. You live a life, you die. People have opinions about you.

What kind of world do we live in when people own historical figures? This is not only profiteering, but it controls a historical narrative. It is thought-control by privatization of history. It limits what we can discuss, what we can express, and how we can do so.

Also, this 70 years after death is just the beginning. Once Disney's properties are in jeopardy, the term will extend again.