Fark Seeks to Trademark NSFW

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "The term NSFW is about to join the :( emoticon, going from a generic, oft-used internet abbreviation, to one company's exclusive trademark. Fark is seeking a trademark on the use of NSFW to describe naughty online content. Of course, they may face a bit of a battle because more than a few other people are already using the term NSFW to describe their products and services. Not that that's stopped anyone in the past." And, of course, the whole thing could be a big practical joke.

Hello?

[morgan_greywolf]

Guess nobody clicked on the story cause it's marked NSFW! :)

Re:Hello?

[77Punker]

I don't have a job, you insensitive clod!

Re:

[fm6]

I get my online access at a public library, you ignorant clod!

Re:Hello?

[jonpublic]

They should try to trademark the Florida tag.

Re:

[cpt kangarooski]

The cost to file a trademark is like $25.

Oops. Look like you mistyped that. The cost to file for a federal trademark is $275 (or more, depending on the details).

You can see the PTO's current fee schedule here: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/qs/ope/fee2007september30.htm [uspto.gov]

You've got it all wrong!

[DeeQ]

The term NSFW is about to join the :( emoticon

NSFW is :)

Re:

[Cornelius the Great]

Technically, it's :-( that's trademarked, not :(

And both trademarks appear to be jokes. Despair, Inc does use the trademark as their logo (although it was Scott Fahlman [wikipedia.org] who first used it in 1982). I don't think prior art works for trademarks.

IANAL, but I'm dating one ;-)

Re:You've got it all wrong!

[Anne_Nonymous]

>> IANAL, but I'm dating one ;-)

I<3ANAL should be your bumper sticker.

Re:

[Cornelius the Great]

I just told her what you said. She didn't get the joke.

I'm guessing that's a good thing.

Re:You've got it all wrong!

[Alzheimers]

NSFW is (.)(.) and 3==D

Re:

[mariotwins]

All it takes to get +5 informative is ASCII boobs and wang? I must be doing it wrong.

Even if it is a joke...

[Bones3D_mac]

... wouldn't Fark want to at least consider seriously doing it before someone else manages it. This could really come back to bite Fark in the ass now that they've opened the pandora's box on the topic by bringing it up.

Re:Even if it is a joke...

[VirusEqualsVeryYes]

As a regular Farker, I think it's safe to assume that there's no malicious intent behind this. Seriously, read the linked blog entry:

About the NSFW Trademark Application, I can say three things:

1) Yes, we applied for it.

2) Can't comment on the prank angle other than "stay tuned."

3) Muhahaha.

Does that sound remotely serious to you?

One of two things will happen. One: the trademark is granted, Drew gets some laughs, lawsuits, and the TM gets taken away. Or two: the trademark is denied from the beginning. Either way, this TM is not going to hold up for obvious reasons already cited in the summary.

I don't think this is opening up any sort of Pandora's box. With or without this development, trolls will TM random shit regardless. We just have to hope that the system corrects itself -- which, in general, it has.

Re:Even if it is a joke...

[EMCEngineer]

I think everyone missed the point of this, and Slashdot fell right into it. The more page hits Drew Curtis gets, the more money he makes. So he has now created a stupid practical joke that is guaranteed to get dozens, if not hundreds, of websites to mention fark.com over and over and over.

Then, he calmly dismisses it as a joke, while raking in profit.

The stupid thing about this is how a few months ago fark went from being fairly open about NSFW imagery, to banning anyone that links to or posts it. Apparently they can make more money by being family(or workplace) friendly.

Here's an idea ...

[trolltalk.com]

"The stupid thing about this is how a few months ago fark went from being fairly open about NSFW imagery, to banning anyone that links to or posts it. Apparently they can make more money by being family(or workplace) friendly."

Time to fork fark!

Re:

[trolltalk.com]

That's *just* all the stuff that's NSFW. You need variety, or you'll go blind!!!

Or is this (people no longer subject to going blind) more proof that humans are evolving 100x faster because of "social changes"? [slashdot.org]

Re:

[KublaiKhan]

Done further with http://www.bannination.com/ [bannination.com] which is more of a true fork, being that it covers the 'wierd news' angle along with the NSFWork content.

Re:Even if it is a joke...

[RyoShin]

The stupid thing about this is how a few months ago fark went from being fairly open about NSFW imagery, to banning anyone that links to or posts it. Apparently they can make more money by being family(or workplace) friendly.

I'm sorry, but: what?

I've been a member of Fark for quite a few years now (five digit ID, aw yeah), and they have always been against the NSFW postings. You could never post actual NSFW images in the discussion forums, even for discussions of a NSFW link. You could link to stuff, but only if you had large notices that the link was NSFW. If something is questionable, they remove it anyway.

Even on the TotalFarker side (who are the only ones that can comment on Boobies links now) you can't post anything like that. Images are auto-disabled for "Adult content" links, too.

Drew has generally tried to keep Fark a place that could be browsed at work, uncaught by language and porn filters. This isn't new. They may have cracked down on porn links recently, but everything else is old hat.

Re:Even if it is a joke...

[pecosdave]

Must remember to not click on anything from RugbyJock.

Re:

[Machtyn]

Actually, they can make more money by being family/workplace friendly. I had written Drew a few years ago requesting the ability to hide the NSFW stuff (before he categorized it). He mentioned that it was going off the main page (and left to other accessible areas) because certain of the advertisers didn't want to advertise on a page that could have been construed as a porn site. He did not elaborate beyond that. Also, realize, a few years ago means 2003-ish.

Re:

[Sancho]

Actually, they can make more money by being family/workplace friendly.

I doubt that's an absolute. Most porn sites would not make more money if they were family/workplace friendly, for example. If a lot of people went to fark just for the NSFW links, and Drew started eliminating those, he would be eliminating fanbase.

Re:

[jcnnghm]

I couldn't agree more, for the $385 it costs to apply for a trademark, he's been front paged on tons of major websites. It's incredibly cheap for the amount of traffic it must be bringing in.

If you really want to screw Microsoft...

[Chmcginn]

You should be buying many, many Xboxs, but no games, since they're still not making any money off the hardware.

Re:

[dissy]

What are the specifications for Xbox ? Can you install Linux on it and turn it into a web server, perhaps a mirror for the GNU project as the ultimate insult ?-)

Short answer: yes

Long answer: Its a 733mhz celeron with 64mb ram. The HD that comes with it will be 8-10gb but one generally desires to replace that part shortly after adding the modchip so you can run your own software.
There are a number of linux distros made avail for it, from some early xbox specific ones, to full debian, or fedora installs, even bsd.

Clustering them of course would get more resources, and potentially boost performance for cluster aware apps.
Its also possible to double the ram to 128mb,

Re:

[Culture20]

I fully support Microsoft's gaming and hardware stuff, because they do it well. It would be nice if they realized that too, because having a company focus its resources on its _strong_ products means the company will win down the road. If you have to cajole people to use your new Operating System, then guess what? It's not your strength as a company.

Re:

[Belial6]

You know, prior to the 360, I would agree that they made good hardware. The 360 on the other hand has been notoriously unreliable, AND it has a tendency to destroy it's own media.

Re:

[Hatta]

Have you ever read News of the Weird? Or listened to Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me on NPR? They steal all their content from Fark.

Re:

[Machtyn]

No, Fark's just made it easy for them to do their work. It would be nice, however, if they would credit their source.

Re:

[UncleTogie]

Amazingly, even today, I still don't know exactly what fark.com is or does.

It's a news aggregator whose focus can best be described by the following MIB line:

Jay: This definitely rates about a 9.0 on my weird-shit-o-meter.

Re:

[Billosaur]

Does that sound remotely serious to you?

No... it sounds juvenile, puerile, and self-serving. The only thing that would make it worse is if the trademark is actually granted. Really, is this what you have to do to get people to notice you. If he's really hot for attention, walk through town in a purple plaid suit with neon orange tie, but leave the internet community out of it.

Re:Even if it is a joke...

[gclef]

it sounds juvenile, puerile, and self-serving.

In other words, totally normal for fark.

Re:

[dissy]

No... it sounds juvenile, puerile, and self-serving. The only thing that would make it worse is if the trademark is actually granted. Really, is this what you have to do to get people to notice you. If he's really hot for attention, walk through town in a purple plaid suit with neon orange tie, but leave the internet community out of it.

But if he did that, how would he make money? Right now all this attention is pulling in banner ad impressions and such.
Unless one could find a company willing to pay you to walk through town in a purple plaid suit with neon orange tie, that would be really stupid for someone to do (Or atleast really pointless), while what he is doing now (making money) sounds really smart.

Re:

[osgeek]

Yikes, you're too much fun for fark, that's for sure.

Don't hurt yourself getting off that high horse.

Re:

[neoform]

So it's ok cause Curtis is being juvenile and 'funny'?

This is patent trolling 100%. Fark didn't invent NSFW and could easily try to extort money if they're granted this trademark.

I'm not sure why anyone's taking fark's side on this one..

Re:

[C0vardeAn0nim0]

because the idea is to show how broken the patent/trademark system is.

this application is social commentary with the added bonus of increasing fark's page views. /i'm a farker //slashdot needs more slashies ///slashies

Re:

[Whammy666]

Fark is a pathetic shell of what it used to be. Drew has really screwed up the site as compared to its glory days. I think this is another attempt at attention whoring to get people to come back to his site. It's not going to work. Fuck Drew. He'll get over it.

Re:

[gad_zuki!]

>Drew gets some laughs, lawsuits, and the TM gets taken away

Abuse of the legal and patent system == hilarious? Are you going to read a 200 page deposition and chuckle all the way through? Yeah I dont think so.

After Drew's disastrous book about the media being unquestioning idiots while his own site was doing its best to support bush's iraq adverentures/WMD and calling global warming a myth up until very recently, well, we're looking at another failure by this small loud-mouth businessman.

If this was trul

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/6254/pic321bs0.jpg [imageshack.us]

Re:

[Zordak]

One of two things will happen. One: the trademark is granted, Drew gets some laughs, lawsuits, and the TM gets taken away. Or two: the trademark is denied from the beginning.

Or three, there is a distinct possibility that the mark will be perfectly valid, will be granted and will be upheld in court. Or four, something else could happen. Or five, another something else could happen ...

I know that this has to be said every single time there's a trademark story on Slashdot, but this is not that big a deal.

Re:

[Sancho]

Yes, although companies sue other people all the time for using their marks in unrelated businesses. Just because you can, doesn't mean that it's not going to suck having that lawsuit hit you.

NSTRBMC

[trolltalk.com]

"Sounds like he's gone into damage control mode to me. He's trying to deflect critics by calling this a "prank." Baloney. What's so funny about this anyway? Nothing. Drew Curtis is a moron. Fuck him."

Sounds like you're bitter ... probably because you bit? Must bite to post on slashdot before you've had your morning coffee?

To help you, here's my contribution to the Aconmymica (TM) ... NSTRBMC (TM) - Not Safe To Reply Before Morning Coffee?

Seriously though, we all know that there are only a few outcome

Re:

[jcuervo]

If it gets denied, we've all (okay, *most* of us) had a good laugh, sort of like along the "OMFG the gubbermint wants to tax email!!!". jokes.

Please cease and desist further use of the following trademarks:

• OMFG
• gubbermint
• it

Re:

[Hal_Porter]

Drew Curtis is a moron.

You misspelled moran.

Re:

[jcnnghm]

I wouldn't call him a moron. This story has been picked up all over the internet. For $385 (the cost to file a trademark application), I don't know that it is possible to get much more promotion.

Re:

[wampus]

I don't know why fark would want NSFW, anyway. Advertisers don't like that crap and we all know it.

Re:

[Spy der Mann]

Probably because they want a nice shiny TM next to the NSFW tag.

Re:

[BiggerIsBetter]

If we're not careful, bannination.com [bannination.com] will go and trademark hurrr. Pandora's box indeed.

If they can do it

[techpawn]

we should trademark IANAL... IMHO...

Re:

[AvitarX]

I'm going to trademark "Florida". That way Drew will have to cross license with me to get most of his crazy news stories.

Re:If they can do it

[Alzheimers]

only if we can trademark IORAL too...
No, Apple already trolled the iOral for their sex toy

Then Apple has probably already trademarked iAnal, too.

Re:

[techpawn]

only if we can trademark IORAL too...
No, Apple already trolled the iOral for their sex toy
Then Apple has probably already trademarked iAnal, too.

I knew this trademark thing was going to be a pain in the arse somehow...

Re:

[aproposofwhat]

I thought Mac users enjoyed that sort of thing, or am I mistaken in my stereotypes?

Re:

[AncientPC]

IANAL, but I think you can argue prior use. :)

NSFW

[olm911]

Go to Fark and read about it. It is just a joke.

Re:

[PastaLover]

Which anyone even remotely familiar with fark knew when they read the headline. I think this poster in the linked fark blog got my sentiments just right: "I can't believe how many people in the blogosphere are falling for it."

WWJD?

[rodney dill]

Trademark WWJD, apparently

In relatiation

[oahazmatt]

In retaliation, CmdrTaco has filed a trademark for "slashies"

/ sorry
// had to do it

Re:

[A Name Similar to Di]

If only... I could finally stop documenting my Java code as a "cost savings mechanism" for the company to avoid paying out royalties to /.

Re:

[iTowelie]

I'm a "Slasher" you insensitive clod!

Y'all don't understand trademark law.

[CygnusTX]

First off, the original post is wrong. The guy is not trying to trademark NSFW to describe naughty online content. The application is for the provision of entertainment services. To complain about this application is very much like complaining about someone trying to trademark the word "Apple" for computers and electronics. Oh my, but who would do that? If the application is registered, it would not take NSFW out of the public domain of posts and the like. It will just prevent the COMMERCIAL use of NSFW for the provision of entertainment services. So, if one of you wanted to use NSFW to sell, say, a cologne, you still could. And you could prevent others from doing so by registering the trademark.

Re:

[jthill]

"Apple" isn't a descriptive acronym.

Re:

[makomk]

IANAL, but (a) I'm pretty sure trademarks don't just affect commercial use, and (b) take a look at nsfw.com - it seems to fit directly into the categories that Fark is applying for a trademark in, and it's not the only site. Basically, Fark has absolutely no right to apply for this trademark.

Y'all don't understand Fark.

[Blakey Rat]

This is probably just a gag. Stop being so serious. Fark's been trying to name stadiums and other landmarks "UFIA" for ages. (You can Google what UFIA stands for.)

Trademark applications

[ebcdic]

... are the new press releases. How easily you are all trolled.

You think it's a joke?

[0xdeadbeef]

Sure, and it was all fun and games until "The Daily WTF" [worsethanfailure.com] was forced to rename by the World Trade Federation.

Re:

[Bones3D_mac]

That kind of reminds me iof the big World Wrestling Federation vs World Wildlife Fund case over the "WWF" moniker. (Which I personally thought was ridiculous considering just about anyone at the time would have associated the term with wrestling before animal conservation.)

Eventually, the World Wrestling Federation changed their to name to World Wrestling Entertainment using the current "WWE" moniker, but included the tagline "Get the F out!" for several months following the ruling.

Re:

[mikael_j]

(Which I personally thought was ridiculous considering just about anyone at the time would have associated the term with wrestling before animal conservation.)

American I take it? I always associated it with the World Wildlife Fund as the World Wrestling Federation was just some crap the cable networks would broadcast in the middle of the night because they could get it for cheap...

/Mikael

Re:

[Hatta]

Which I personally thought was ridiculous considering just about anyone at the time would have associated the term with wrestling before animal conservation.

Only if you're into wrestling. The rest of the civilized world doesn't pay any attention to it. The WWF has always been the World Wildlife Foundation to me.

Re:

[Bones3D_mac]

Hmm... yeah, I suppose the vegan/hippie/peta crowd probably wouldn't enjoy watching people beating on each other, even if it is all staged.

Maybe we need to start going back to the days of feeding christians to the lions to get a worthwhile audience...

Re:

[Torvaun]

I seem to remember that the World Wrestling Federation were the ones who were trying to trademark WWF, and the World Wildlife Fund was resisting it. They switched to WWE because no one else was using that one.

Kind of like why Intel switched to Pentium instead of using 586.

Re:

[rossdee]

Intel was told you can't trademark a number

Re:

[Torvaun]

I realize that, I meant in the more general "they couldn't keep anyone else from using it." Like the World Wrestling Federation.

It's OK if they get it

[RailGunner]

Drew will license it for beer. No worries.

The dangers of NSFW!

[HeliosTrick]

A friend told me that NSFW stood for "Now Show Friends and Workmates"... I'm now unemployed :(

Well played sir

[Loosifur]

I think this may be the finest job of trolling I've ever seen, as illustrated by the length and quality of this thread. Sometimes I just wake up filled with gratitude that I live in such exciting times. /obligatory //tribute ///slashies

They couldn't anyway

[Loki_1929]

They couldn't get the trademark for something they didn't invent. NSFW is a 4chan thing. Mootles would undoubtedly have evidence of significant prior art somewhere in his sperm-soaked basement apartment of his parents' tiny shack.

until this story

[mikesd81]

I never knew what NSFW was abbreviation for.

That's the place where shadowbanning occurs?

[sethstorm]

If you thought RTBL editing was bad, at least your posts show [wikipedia.org] up [google.com].

But it'd be quite nice to see that happen here for some of the obscured redirects.

Slashdot Trademarks

[cashman73]

Quick! I need to prepare my trademark application for the phrase, "In Soviet Russia,..." [trademark owns YOU]! Although this guy [wikipedia.org] probably already did that back in the 80s,... oh well -- maybe they'll still let it slip by, with all the dupes around here already,... ;-)

Why those...

[davidsyes]

Motherfarkers....

Can't believe it's not being done already

[ajs318]

I'm really surprised that someone hasn't tried to start a registry of pet names, and extort money from pet owners wanting to give those names to their pets. Animal names represent valuable Intellectual Property, don'tcha know. That cat you've got, Enrico Agache Something Amelia Earhart*, I hear you've been calling him Chico for short? That'll be ..... what ..... £100 a year to name a cat Chico. Or you can go to court to argue it out ..... but it's cheaper to pay up right now .....

* Only Chico

Bannination.com

[heresyoftruth]

A lot of folks fled fark because of the crazy moderation disasters, shadowban's, and sometimes real consequences. I have talked to folks that have no idea why they were banned. They only found out after someone said their posts weren't showing. I have even talked to one individual that claims some of the moderators at fark have gone so far as to try and mark him as a pedophile stalker.

Since all these people are nice, well spoken, and seemingly intelligent, it's hard to ignore. More and more stories accum

NSFW

[PPH]

Not Suitable For Wanking?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Slashdot's coolness is based upon the users.
The fact that its freshness jumped the shark right around the first MicroSoft ad, while indeed tragic, is also peripheral.
Can't fault CdrTaco & Co. for making a buck--slashdot is not a vow of poverty, after all, but if the site is uncool, that's our problem.

Re:

[Megaweapon]

Can't fault CdrTaco & Co. for making a buck

I don't fault either CmdrTaco nor Drew Curtis for trying to "make a buck". It's the method of doing so. If Slashdot tries to think of itself as a bastion of "open source" while running ads for Microsoft or Fark reeling back on it's past of "boobies and beer" by shadowbanning users that post non-moderator approved cleavage (despite the near NSFW ads they sometimes run) the sellout factor becomes apparent.

Re:

[jafiwam]

Well Drew did get the "ass ads" (seriously, naked man's ass) pulled because people bitched about it.

I think there's details in the blog entry, and either the ad network got dropped or threatened to be dropped.

I never saw it though, I block all ads from both Slashdot and Fark. (Pretty much everywhere else too.) It's my internet, you all can get the fark off of it or figure something else out to make money. My eyeballs belong to the hotties at the bar I frequent.

Re:

[Megaweapon]

The slashdot audience might be largely pro-open source, which indeed may render your statement true. I am not sure you can apply that same label to slashdot itself as a corporate entity.

Today Slashdot is owned by SourceForge, Inc., but it is still run by many of the same people as it was 'Back in the Day'. [slashdot.org]

Combining user-developed content, online marketplaces and e-commerce, SourceForge is the global technology community's nexus for information exchange, goods for geeks, and open source software distributio [sourceforge.com]

Re:

[Bones3D_mac]

Fark kinda started losing its "coolness" factor once they started banning people for linking to legitimate news sources that carried video clips of the Saddam Hussein execution. Hell, they even told me they'd ban anyone that posted links to any site with video clips covering significant historical events, such as the controversial Zapruder "JFK assassination" film.

Re:

[jtfryman]

Now that is recursion at its finest.... Imagine a superscript TM with a smaller superscript TM above it, trailing off into the nether regions of unprintability...

Re:Truer words were never spoken

[glindsey]

Seriously speaking, I'm betting Drew just wanted to see how many news outfits he could get to carry such a ridiculous story, and how much of an overreaction and outrage said coverage would generate in the blogosphere. An effective publicity stunt, really, considering the recent publication of his book [amazon.com] and its subject matter.

Wait a minute... whenever other companies attempt to patent/trademark/copyright something stupid, Slashdot jumps right on it, and rightly so because it's a stupid move. We freak out about patent trolls and people trying to copyright emoticons. If Fark really were honestly trying to trademark "NSFW," why would it be ridiculous or overreacting for everybody to point out how broken the system is, and how much respect Fark has lost for pulling such an ass move?

Are we saying that abuses of the copyright, trademark, and patent systems are not newsworthy now? If this is a joke, then more power to them, but I see no reason why those sorts of things shouldn't evoke outrage.

Re:Truer words were never spoken

[kent_eh]

If this application actually gets approved, I'm guessing that Drew will be the first to point out the system is sooo broken that anyone can register pretty much anything.

And the rest of the Farkers will post hundreds of variations of "pOwned" or the Nelson "Ha Ha" picture [wordpress.com]

Drew is just pointing out that the emperor really has no pants, and poking fun at the fact.
SOP at Fark.

Re:

[truesaer]

Are we saying that abuses of the copyright, trademark, and patent systems are not newsworthy now? If this is a joke, then more power to them, but I see no reason why those sorts of things shouldn't evoke outrage.

It's just an application. I can't think of any possible means by which you could prevent people from mailing in a piece of paper requesting a trademark on anything they want. Doesn't mean it will be granted.

The only reason this gets so much attention is because of the spastic crybaby melodrama. A

Re:

[UbuntuDupe]

In any case, the "imaginary property" is just a slogan, not an actual argument or principled stand. As I have argued many times before.

IP *rights* and physical property *rights* are both intangible.

The *referents* of both IP and physical property rights are both tangible. (i.e. even IP restricts your use of *tangible* things, even if it is metaphorically phrased as use of an intangible idea)

Re:

[russotto]

IP rights make it illegal for me to write "Space, the final frontier / These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise / blah blah blah / where no man has gone before". What tangible things have those IP rights restricted me from using? _My_ keyboard? Contrast with real property, which I'd have to actually enter to trespass upon.

Re:

[UbuntuDupe]

What tangible things have those IP rights restricted me from using?

Anything tangible that can instatiate that message.

Yes, I understand there are good arguments against IP. My point was just that it does, undeniably, lay claim to tangible things.

_My_ keyboard? Contrast with real property, which I'd have to actually enter to trespass upon.

In other words, IP is invalid, because it infinges on rights that are valid, and IP isn't one of them. Nice and circular.

Re:

[russotto]

So the tangible things that Paramount's copyright on that paragraph refer to are pretty much everything which can infringe it, from the crudest stylus to the Internet? That doesn't make sense. The tangible things which real property rights refer to are the property itself, not those things which can trespass on it. Same for personal property.

You only have to resort to claiming the instruments of infringement as the "tangible things" in the case of IP because the property itself _isn't_ tangible.

Re:

[UbuntuDupe]

So the tangible things that Paramount's copyright on that paragraph refer to are pretty much everything which can infringe it, from the crudest stylus to the Internet? That doesn't make sense.

Actually, it makes perfect sense.

Just like the right to transmit radio waves along frequency 120kHz refers to pretty much every TANGIBLE transmitter which can broadcast along that frequency.

Just like the right to your "personal property" refers to pretty much every TANGIBLE thing that could infringe on it.

Re:

[russotto]

Just like the right to your "personal property" refers to pretty much every TANGIBLE thing that could infringe on it.

Which illustrates your error. My personal property is itself tangible: my car, my computer, my furniture. There's no need to resort to your axe (which you might use to destroy them) to bring anything tangible into it.

Re:

[rodney dill]

Though the National Weather Service may be a little miffed about it.

Re:

[sm62704]

Well duh. Click the link to the journal posting titled "NSFW". I guess I should have quoted thustly:

Tami was groaning in extasy, her huge legs wrapped around my back. I lay between her giant breasts, pumping hard, sweat drupping off our naked bodies...

And the last sentence in the journal: "I called in today. I'm not safe for work."