p2pnet - rss feed: MPAA’s Lucky & Flo extreme makeovers
p2pnet news | Off Topic:- Wassup, Dawg?
Well, Hollywood mouthperson-in-chief Dan Glickman is absolutely delighted with the transformation of studio super-sniffers Lucky and Flo, says MPAA dog-wrangler John Malcolm.
The two highly trained Labrador retrievers, able to nose out copyrighted DVDs by scent alone, have been wowing the mainstream media around the world with their amazing olfactory skills.
On Monday ace p2pnet reporter Emma Newton revealed new products for the doggy elite.
Pawfume and nail pawlish, as well as a special shampooch, are being marketed with adverts in major magazines
Now, Lucky and Flo have each undergone extreme makeovers in the best Hollywood tradition.
They’ve been fitted with specially styled wigs which they’ll wear at media photo shoots, and the bright red polish used on their claws has been custom formulated to make it chip-resistant.
“Pawlish and hair-pieces are fine,” says Malcolm, but, “We had to draw the line at Pawfume for obvious reasons.
“It might obscure the delicate scent of pirated product.”
Also See:
doggy elite - Juicy tail, November 5, 2007
amazing olfactory skills - MPAA Super Snorters sniff sin, April 18, 2007
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for the download, and here for details. Click here or here to learn how to by-pass censorship in your area.
November 10th, 2007 at 11:51 am
lol nice picture right down to the pawicure and wag.. err wig..
November 10th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
Woof! Just like the Beattles save for the fact that these ones are smarter, stronger and more social.
November 10th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
good photoshopping
November 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
which one is glickman?
November 10th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
a little late for halloween?
November 11th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Has anyone figure out how Lucky and Flow are going to explain to the judge how their criteria for selecting their victims.. err, I mean their suspects.
After all to open the baggage of a suspect, unless all baggages are opened, there must be a reasonable reason to suspect a specific baggage, at least in the USA (as decided by the Supreme Court, that the police cannot check some car only at a police check point, it all or nothing). So Lucky and Flow are the ones that must explain to the judge or jury what reasonable reason they had to declare a specific bag as suspect.
Also. has anyone been acused and found guilty bases on testimony of Lucky and Flo (a measure of their success)?
November 11th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
it works like htis. l and f sniff suspects bums. if its good theyre not guilty. If they dont like the aroma the suspects asses is grasses.