Slashdot Mirror


Best Buy Uses DMCA To Quash Black Friday Prices

Sethb writes "It looks like Best Buy didn't learn from Wal-Mart last year, and has now invoked the DMCA in order to prevent FatWallet from posting information about what items they will have on sale the day after Thanksgiving. Hopefully FatWallet will stand up for themselves again, and Best Buy will be laughed out of court."

640 comments

  1. Next Headline: by j0keralpha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Major Book Publishers use DMCA to quash blurbs and book reviews!

    This law is getting just a shade ridiculous.

    1. Re:Next Headline: by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 5, Funny

      I wonder if it can be used to keep my grades from being released to my parents, I mean yes; they pay the tuition, but isnt the semi-unique sequence of D's and F's my copyright?

      ...Can I sue my university for even printing them? ;)

    2. Re:Next Headline: by Aadain2001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      By law, Universities can not release grades to anyone but the person they belong to, not even the parents of the student unless the student give's his/her permission first. Want to keep your parents from seeing the grades? Don't send them to them.

      --
      Space for rent, inquire within
    3. Re:Next Headline: by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, and what how fast Mom and Dad stop paying for your school.

    4. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      When I was at Purdue, they used the super secret method of mailing your grades to your parent's address, with your name on the envelope. So your 'grades were not released to your parents' as long as they did not open the envelope that came in their mailbox with 'grades enclosed' marked on the outside.

    5. Re:Next Headline: by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2, Funny

      This law is getting just a shade ridiculous.

      I wasn't aware that the law had changed at all.

    6. Re:Next Headline: by quonsar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Right, and what how fast Mom and Dad stop paying for your school.

      they may as well cut their losses as stand around and what it being wasted on you.

    7. Re:Next Headline: by mcowger · · Score: 1

      At my University I had to sign something to alow my parents to receive my grades, even though they paid the tuition. It had soemthing to do with FERPA.

    8. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WARNING: The parent's sig contains a link to bartse.cx! Actually, that site is fucking hilarious.

    9. Re:Next Headline: by PPGMD · · Score: 1

      Hah, the semester after I graduated *doh* my University went to online grades only, unless you requested a report card.

    10. Re:Next Headline: by devilspgd · · Score: 1

      Of course, opening a letter addressed to someone other then yourself is, as I understand it, a criminal offense.

      IANAL, and I'm not an American, so I might be on crack here.

      --
      Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
    11. Re:Next Headline: by EvanED · · Score: 1

      I think it is, at least if the person it is addressed to is of the age of majority anyway.

      Though seriously, who would call up the cops and be like "my parents opened my letter"...

    12. Re:Next Headline: by jetmarc · · Score: 4, Funny

      > I wonder if it can be used to keep my grades from being released to my parents,
      > I mean yes; they pay the tuition, but isnt the semi-unique sequence of D's and
      > F's my copyright?

      Certainly you can sue the university for circumventing your resistance to reveal
      your copyrighted and well-covered skill profile. Printing and releasing it to
      third parties qualifies the university as professional class attacker, probably
      driven by monetary or political incentives. This should be enough to arrest them
      under DMCA for at least 6 months and then sending them to Russia.

    13. Re:Next Headline: by fleener · · Score: 1

      That's no surprise. A university mails your grades to the address you gave them. Obviously, after you applied to the university, you never updated your address with them.

    14. Re:Next Headline: by rnbc · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know about the USA, but here in Portugal student's grades are public domain, by law.

      As soon as they are official they are available to anyone who cares to request them.

      --
      You cannot proceed from the informal to formal by formal means
    15. Re:Next Headline: by devilspgd · · Score: 1

      heh. True enough

      --
      Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
    16. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there any one lobbying for it to be repealed....?

    17. Re:Next Headline: by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2, Funny
      Right, and what how fast Mom and Dad stop paying for your school.

      That might affect whether or not you want to let them see your marks. :-)

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    18. Re:Next Headline: by richardalan · · Score: 1

      In the Unites States, there is already a law covering that known as FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act). At the college level grades are not supposed to be released to anyone but the student. Parents can't be shown grades even if they are paying for their child's education.

    19. Re:Next Headline: by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      You could probably sue your university under privacy laws if they send your grades to your 'rents.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    20. Re:Next Headline: by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      They most certainly could if the book was marked "ADVANCED PREVIEW COPY-- NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION". Reviewers have a tradition of not reviewing material until its been released, even though they're invited to see advanced screenings. In the Fat Wallet case, what they're dealing with is leaked information that isn't intended to become public until a week from Thursday... the stores still have a right to change their ads at this point.

    21. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      stand around and what it being wasted on you

      Pretty good.

    22. Re:Next Headline: by Artifakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Announced today on Wired News - A lawsuit by a garage door manufacturer that tried to use the DMCA to stop another company from making replacement universal remote controls was dismissed, with the court noting that the entire area was well outside the boundaries of those issues the DMCA was intended to address. This law started off a shade rediculous, but is getting reined in. We can hope (and work) for more such decisions.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    23. Re:Next Headline: by benzapp · · Score: 1

      Wow, I might have actually studied harder if that was the case in the US...

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    24. Re:Next Headline: by mjpaci · · Score: 1

      Don't you realize that when you signed that book in the President's office you gave full permission to the school to send your grades home?

      Nice office, crappy building.

    25. Re:Next Headline: by glenebob · · Score: 1

      You should be thankful and display your grades with pride. After all, some people have a very non-unique sequence of F's! So while you're complaining about your own misfortune, try to think about the folks who REALLY have it bad, OK?

    26. Re:Next Headline: by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      If nothing else that would make the tyranny of the transcript a thing of the past. Most employers who care about grades (usually for first time graduates) want an offical transcrpt, which generally costs the student, a few dollars per copy. Which is a pretty nice margin since I've seen them in various files since graduation and they are generally just photo copy. Possibly with a clerks sig or seal.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    27. Re:Next Headline: by sjlumme · · Score: 1

      That is definitely not the case in the US. If anyone wants to know my grades, they have to ask me, and then I can request a transcript to be sent to them by the Institute. Exceptions are made for Institute officials, but I had to explicitly sign a form authorizing them to release them to scholarship organizations. From the time I spent at UC Berkeley, I seem to remember the same is true for public universities.

    28. Re:Next Headline: by JonTurner · · Score: 4, Funny

      >>isnt the semi-unique sequence of D's and F's my copyright?

      No. Unfortunately for me, I can claim prior art.

    29. Re:Next Headline: by WNight · · Score: 1

      They could mark it with anything they want, but it wouldn't change what you can do with it.

      Did you agree (before being given the book) to an NDA? If not, you're not under any restrictions.

    30. Re:Next Headline: by nyseal · · Score: 1

      Better yet, to my employer who just gave me a raise because I got an 'A' in business management for my PhD.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    31. Re:Next Headline: by BigAssRat · · Score: 1

      A-F is a hexidecimal sequene, that would seem to be somewhat computer related to me. Go for it! :-)

    32. Re:Next Headline: by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1

      ...my grades...the semi-unique sequence of D's and F's

      I have a job programming computers and I don't make enough money to feed myself; but hey, that's free market economy.

      Are you so sure the economy is to blame on that one? :)

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    33. Re:Next Headline: by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      Is it just me, or is something wrong with BestBuy.com? I tried visiting their site once about a week or two ago and again tonight... Both times I got:

      "Thanks for Stopping By. BestBuy.com is temporarily unavailable. We apologize for the inconvenience. Please come back soon to shop our biggest store. To check the status of an existing order, call Customer Care at 1-888-BESTBUY (237-8289)."

    34. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We aren't talking about Portugal are we?
      I don't know about the Earth, but here on Xamadu 3, idiots are shot on sight, by law.
      Huh?
      Yeah, exactly.

    35. Re:Next Headline: by tomas2 · · Score: 1

      This crap is getting out of hand. This act is made for the greedy by the greedy. If corporations have their way, common people won't be able to own anything, they will have to license it. Your car, house, tv, books, etc.

    36. Re:Next Headline: by neirboj · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness, the university may only have the right to grant access to your records to a very limited number of people without your consent, not including your parents. The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is the law that governs educational records. From what I understand, the student and his/her parents share information controlling rights until the student turns 18. After that time, all rights are transferred to the student.

    37. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow dude. You. Must have. Like had trouble with that. First job, eh? It. Might be because. You have problems writing, complete, sentences, and, don't know, where to, place your, commas.

    38. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I don't know about the USA, but here in Portugal student's grades are public domain, by law.


      As soon as they are official they are available to anyone who cares to request them.

      I don't know who runs the schools there but they're obviously not concerned about monetary income like they US is. It's obvious that noone that pays thousands and thousands of dollars a semester wants their name on a list saying they're in the idiot bracket. I think many many colleges would notice many people saying fuck that and going to a school that didn't post their name and their grade. It's nobodies fucking business how smart or stupid I am. Fuck that, I'll tutor myself and ask smart people on the internet questions. Bah.

    39. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not necessarily. A lot of universities just have an incredibly insulting attitude towards thier students. At UW-Madison, for example, we were told that they were going to mail midterm grades to your parents whether you liked it or not.

    40. Re:Next Headline: by The_K4 · · Score: 1

      Actually having been in a simular situation, it's illegal to open mail not addressed to you, or someone who currently lives at the same address as you. I ran into this a few years ago....a group of us at college all lived in the same apartment, and 1 roommate oppened a letter addressed to another roommate. The one who it was addressed to wasn't to happy....turns out since both roommates had the same address and both currently occupied that address the person who opened it didn't break the law.

    41. Re:Next Headline: by The_K4 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Easy, after your parents get the grades (assuming that you didn't expressly authorize it) get a lawyer....the school has just broken FEDERAL law. The same law that's currently being used by school to try and prevent the RIAA from getting student's names. I can not for the life of me remember the name of the law, but it give student's a great deal of control over the informationt he school has about them, including grades.

    42. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The EXACT opposite in the US.

      FERPA saved my ass once. I got arrested for hacking into a school computer system (ok yes, I was an ass, it was stupid, and dammit I was 17 okay? In 7 years I've changed). In addition to having the piss scared out of me, the principal decided to have me suspended for violating the school's "computer policy."

      My mother being the watchdog she is waltzed into the principal's office and sat down and said one word: "FERPA."

      Seems the detectives had asked the associate principle whether I was a "good student," and the guy helpfully gave them my transcript. WHOOPS. That's apparently majorly fucking illegal, because the instant my mother said this the principal's face went white, he stammered around a bit and then expunged the suspension. This happened before my eyes. The associate principal got canned the next week, and until the day I graduated I was known as "the guy who got the assoc. fired."

      So basically in the US, even the police can't access those records without a warrant, or parental/student consent.

      As for the arrest, as if you care, I got a slap on the wrist and you can bet your ass I never did anything like that again. FYI: My biggest mistake was saying "I think I need a lawyer." As I later found out (the detective and I became friends), he never planned on arresting me in the first place but since I was behaving like an ass, he did it to piss me off. They would have just verbally "roughed me up a little" had I not got snappy with them. So my advice is if you confront the police, don't be a prick.

    43. Re:Next Headline: by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      Most likely because Portugal is a nation of savages, like other Europen States, where education is publicly funded.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    44. Re:Next Headline: by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > my advice is if you confront the police, don't be a prick.

      See, I go about entirely differently. I am very amiable & polite, but I am still a complete asshole. IE, I tell them what they don't want to hear but can't do anything about and play very close to the rules, but I make it damn well known that they are hired to serve me, not to bully me around. Granted, I have never been caught for anything that would put me in jail. It would be an entirely different matter then ("yes, massa"). I'm not totally stupid, just a bit so.

    45. Re:Next Headline: by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Announced today on Wired News - A lawsuit by a garage door manufacturer that tried to use the DMCA to stop another company from making replacement universal remote controls was dismissed

      Umm, just a point, here... that was not announced today... That was announced like... 3 months ago? Maybe 2?

    46. Re:Next Headline: by JackHart · · Score: 1

      Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. I believe this is what you are referring to.

    47. Re:Next Headline: by rifter · · Score: 1

      Major Book Publishers use DMCA to quash blurbs and book reviews!

      This law is getting just a shade ridiculous.

      Well, rather, its misapplications. Remember that the DMCA is only meant to protect copyrighted material. Facts, such as the price of items, are no more copyrightable than the innards of your garage, though it seems some lawyer-monkeys are trying to claim they are protected by the DMCA.

    48. Re:Next Headline: by rifter · · Score: 1

      > Announced today on Wired News - A lawsuit by a garage door manufacturer that tried to use the DMCA to stop another company from making replacement universal remote controls was dismissed

      Umm, just a point, here... that was not announced today... That was announced like... 3 months ago? Maybe 2?

      But it was only announced on Slashdot today.

    49. Re:Next Headline: by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > > That was announced like... 3 months ago?
      > But it was only announced on Slashdot today.

      Yeah, and we all know how up-to-the-minute Slashdot headlines are :)

    50. Re:Next Headline: by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      Wired made the same mistake. Can you believe they even dated the decision wrong? So did the register.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    51. Re:Next Headline: by araemo · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I think that wouldn't float in court. You were negligent for not updating the college with your local address. If you don't supply them with one, they don't have any way of knowing you aren't still living at home. Many colleges put somewhere in the registration "Is this address your current address?" "Please make corrections below" or something similar, so if they did that, I think their ass is legally covered.

    52. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As the son of a retired state police detective and the black sheep of the family (my family anyways), it never hurts to use the "sir" word. Also, never ever say "I know my rights", I tried that when a local cop was f*cking with a me and two friends. My buddy who was a true black sheep, stepped in and told me off, which got the local off our backs. BTW, I think that was the same guy who got caught pulling over women and accousting them, but I am not sure.

      The vast majority of officers are professionals who have a tough job, their average day is dealing with other people's worst days. Always be polite, you shouldn't however be a doormat.

  2. national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    ill be saving lots of money by sticking with ad-busters "National Buy Nothing Day" on "black friday" and sticking up for our culture.

    or whats left of it.

    have fun at wal-mart suckers

    1. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was planning to do this as well, though not for any deep reason. I just have no desire to go out and deal with all those crowds, it gets bad enough on a normal weekend.

    2. Re:national buy nothing day by shepd · · Score: 1

      Why the animosity towards buying things?

      I just want to know what the hullabaloo about buy nothing day really is.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    3. Re:national buy nothing day by Vann_v2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't worry, I'll buy twice as much to make up for it!

    4. Re:national buy nothing day by iocat · · Score: 1

      Of course you should buy nothing. You should spend Friday playing all the RPGs you haven't had time to play. Or polishing off Prince of Persia. Thursday is for multiplayer gaming, Friday is for single player gaming. It's the perfect videogaming holiday.

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    5. Re:national buy nothing day by Saeger · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I just want to know what the hullabaloo about buy nothing day really is.

      It's to get you thinking about what the fuck you're doing with your life and the world around you.

      Why are you filling your life up with useless shit (made by slave-labor in China)? What's the point? Are you charging it to a credit card that you've never had a zero balance on? Does it make you feel happier than no-money fun with friends/family? Why is that?

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    6. Re:national buy nothing day by October_30th · · Score: 1
      Are you charging it to a credit card that you've never had a zero balance on?

      Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it? If you can afford to buy stuff without credit, you don't need one.

      Does it make you feel happier than no-money fun with friends/family? Why is that?

      That's the same line some people have about alcohol. "Why would you go outside drinking with your friends when you can have fun with your friends without alcohol?". What's implied is that the person in question is incapable of having fun without alcohol and is therefore somehow crippled.

      What they miss, however, is that while you can certainly have fun with friends without alcohol, drinking tends to make it even more fun.

      So, if we go back to your original argument, sure I can have fun with my friends without money but spending money tends to make it even more fun. Same thing applies to buying stuff like a new hard drive, furniture, clothes or whatever makes you happy just for yourself.

      There's nothing wrong with buying stuff. Consumption is what makes a modern society run.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    7. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks to the Bush economy I have no choice but to join you!

    8. Re:national buy nothing day by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it?
      Any number of reasons:
      • You don't want to pay rent (interest) on the card, but you still want the convenience.
      • You want to use a card for the protections it offers (getting your money back in the event the product is defective or in the event that a mail-order product doesn't even exist).
      • You wish to make a large purchase and you don't wish to carry that much cash on your person
      • You want to avoid writing a check that can be later used to drain your bank account.

      Note that a debit card offers some of these protections, but the fact that your money can be tied up during an investigation makes the debit card a dangerous and unsuitable substitute for a credit card.

      --
      Yeah, right.
    9. Re:national buy nothing day by penguinboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Are you charging it to a credit card that you've never had a zero balance on?

      Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it? If you can afford to buy stuff without credit, you don't need one.

      Why use a credit card, even if you don't need one?

      1. Easier than carrying around a stack of cash, or checks

      2. Accepted more than checks

      3. Buying online or by phone. Sure. a *few* vendors might let you mail cash, checks, or money orders, but mailing takes several days and CCs are instant.

      4. Protection. Can't charge-back with cash

      5. Records. You get a monthly itemized list of all transactions. With cash you have to keep track by hand

      6. Float. You don't have to pay until the end of your billing cycle.

      7. Building credit. You can use a credit card (without carrying a balance) to establish a good credit history for when you want larger loans (car, house) later.

      Plenty of benefits, and what would you use instead?
    10. Re:national buy nothing day by October_30th · · Score: 1
      what would you use instead?

      Debit card. Where I live personal checks (as opposed to corporate checks) became pretty much obsolete in 1980s. You can't cash/use them anymore.

      Debit card gives you all the benefits you quote except for the number 6 and 3. Charge back is handled by the shop if you have the receipt.

      I don't quite understand your point 7. When you apply for a major credit card like Visa or MasterCard they want to know your income and any debt you might already have. Does using credit card somehow enhance one's credit rating?

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    11. Re:national buy nothing day by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Wonderful idea... miss out on all of the one-day loss leader offers and therefore pay more when you have to buy similar items later for gift-giving...

    12. Re:national buy nothing day by penguinboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't quite understand your point 7. When you apply for a major credit card like Visa or MasterCard they want to know your income and any debt you might already have. Does using credit card somehow enhance one's credit rating?

      While probably not much use to someone with established credit, they're good for starting out. It's better to get a credit card and use it responsibly to prove you're worthy of other kinds of credit, than to have no history at all.

    13. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does using credit card somehow enhance one's credit rating?

      If you make your payments on time each month, then yes, it'll boost your rating; which makes sense - if you've never had a credit card, you're an unknown risk, wheras if you have a card and pay it off, you're a good risk. Yes, you can still get a credit card without existing credit, but the limit will be fairly low and the interest rate fairly high; those things will change once you've had the card for a while and made all your payments.

      And actually, from what I've heard, carrying a balance boosts your credit rating more than paying it off each month. If you don't have a card now and want to establish your rating, get a card, go max it out on something (computer, appliance, whatever), and pay it off over the course of about a year, making all the payments on time. Yes, you'll end up paying money in interest, but it will give you a nice credit rating jump-start.

    14. Re:national buy nothing day by LostCluster · · Score: 2

      8. Rebates. If you have good credit, you will qualify for special offer cards that either give "reward points" or even cold hard cash for making purchases. The bank is basically giving you a share of the merchant fees they collect from the store for being such a low-risk credit customer. Getting 1% cash for every card purchase you make during the year can add up to real money quickly, and cost you nothing assuming you pay all the balances on time and make sure that the card doesn't hit you with a membership fee. Even if it's not a lot of money, it's still more money than you'd have if you had spent cash.

    15. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you actually use a credit card for credit you are a sucker. You think 20% interest is a good idea? Your credit card should have a zero balance at the end of every month.

    16. Re:national buy nothing day by October_30th · · Score: 1
      If you actually use a credit card for credit you are a sucker. You think 20% interest is a good idea?

      As I said, if you already have the money you don't need the credit.

      On the other hand, if you need to buy a lot of stuff at once (like getting basic furniture for your new, empty house) you will need a loan anyway. You can get it from a bank, but that means paperwork and waiting for the bank's decision. On the other hand, if you have a credit card with a decent limit (mine is $6000) you don't have to deal with the red tape anymore.

      The bank interest for a loan that's going to be spent on a car or furniture is typically about the same as the credit card interest.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    17. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to graduate school with my life, and will then be going to law school. I also have a great family and girlfriend. I also like to buy things that you term 'useless shit'. What exactly are you referring to?

    18. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bank loan on car or house, ~4%, credit card interest, 18-21%. That's the same? And guess what's happening while the bank is "making the decision" about your loan. They are checking your credit!

    19. Re:national buy nothing day by wes33 · · Score: 1

      think about this: "buy nothing day" is logically equivalent to "earn nothing day"

      (just putting off buying something by a day doesn't count!)

    20. Re:national buy nothing day by Zed2K · · Score: 1

      Why use a debit card and have to pay immediately when you can use a credit card. Buy at the beginning of your billing cycle and not have to pay for 45 or more days. Keep your money in an interest earning account earning money.

      A debit card is no better than writing a check, its just instant where a check takes a few bank days.

      Also, when you use a debit card you are giving the vendor permission to pull money out of your attached account. Why in the world would anyone give a vendor permission to do this is beyond me. With a credit card it takes one phone call to dispute a charge. If its a legit dispute you are immediately credited and it becomes a fight between your credit card company and vendor. If there is a dispute with your debit card, it won't be as easy to get reimbursed and may impact your ability to live if its too much of an error.

      Having a credit card does impact your credit rating. If you've never had a credit card and you try and get a loan it will hurt your ability to get the loan. No credit is just as bad as bad credit.

    21. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Don't you have, um, "regular" VISA's in the
      States? The language of your post seems to imply
      you dont.

      Here in Norway at least, the most common card is
      simply called a "bank card" which merely taps right
      into a bank account of your liking. (Usually the one
      your wage is paid to.)

      These are exactly the same as the credit cards in
      how they look, where you can use them, and so on.
      The only difference is that they tap into a bank
      account which cannot go lower than 0, whereas a
      credit card taps into a account that cannot go
      higher than 0 and lower than whatever your credit
      limit is. In fact, only the banks knows if the
      VISA you're paying with is a "bank card" or a
      credit card.

      I would find it astounding to learn that you don't
      have such cards -- they're by far the most common
      here.

      But then again I suppose the credit card
      companies get more debt slaves as customers if
      there's only credit cards available, as that gives
      you the possibility to spend more than you can
      afford, something normal bank cards doesn't...
      *wanders off mumbling abount greedy companies*

    22. Re:national buy nothing day by fiftyfly · · Score: 1
      ill be saving lots of money by sticking with ad-busters "National Buy Nothing Day" on "black friday" and sticking up for our culture. or whats left of it.
      What's that? I thought youre (presumming a yank) 'culture' was built on the desire for a little bargain hunting. Heck I bet walmart even sells tea.
      --
      "Sanity is not statistical", George Orwell, "1984"
    23. Re:national buy nothing day by fermion · · Score: 1
      While I appreciate and understand your sentiment, most credit cards have had a zero balance at one point, although it is becoming less common with balance transfers.

      What the real issue is is whether your credit card has a revolving balance, and if you are periodically able to pay it down.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    24. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had several cards in college, and around senior year got hit by a fit of apathy and let my cards max out, missed lots of payments before getting myself back on track. A few months later, when I wanted to buy a car, they told me I had excellant credit. I sure don't know how that happened.

    25. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, they're called debit cards. I personally don't like them for three reasons. First, they draw straight out of my bank account, so if it gets stolen, then money is gone. With a credit card, I'm only responsible for $50 of fraudulent charges, and many credit card companies don't make you responsible at all. Second, with a credit card I'm earning interest until I pay the bill. That's called the 'float', and it adds up pretty substantially over time. Finally, a credit card helps build up a credit rating, which makes it much easier to finance a house or a card. A debit card does not build up a rating, unless you try to overdraw (which isn't possible with a credit card), in which case your credit rating can only go down.

      Credit cards are actually a *much* better deal for consumers, especially if they don't carry a balance (and you never should). It's little to do with greedy companies or debt slaves.

    26. Re:national buy nothing day by IncohereD · · Score: 1

      The best deal for a credit company is the customer who almost goes bankrupt, but never does. i.e. you pay stuff off many times over in interest, making them money, but never default, losing them money.

    27. Re:national buy nothing day by willfe · · Score: 5, Informative

      Debit cards can be exceedingly dangerous, namely in that you are not offered the same protections against fraud that you are automatically provided by a credit card.

      Suppose your card is stolen and someone makes dozens of little purchases so as not to raise suspicion, or gets a fake I.D. with your name on it so he can charge up a storm. If it's a credit card, once you report it stolen, you're not liable for any of the charges made on it. If it's a debit card, real, actual money has been sucked out of your bank account, never to be seen again. Good luck getting that back. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm suggesting it's far more difficult.

      Saying "chargeback is handled by the shop if you have the receipt" isn't the issue; suppose the shop rips you off. Suppose you pay in advance for something with a debit card but never receive the product? What does your bank do then?

      Regarding point 7 -- credit lending is a fickle mistress, but does adhere to at least some principles:

      • When you have no credit history whatsoever, you normally cannot obtain a substantial amount of credit. A car loan (even on a new car) is about the best you can get (because it's a secured loan -- they can take real property if you default). A mortgage is usually impossible to obtain without previous credit unless you have a significant (30% or more) down payment ready to go. Generally credit is established by obtaining a fairly high-interest rate credit card with a low credit limit (say about $2,500 if you have good, verifiable income, lower if you your wages are single-digit figures per hour).
      • Your credit history is established as you charge to it and make payments every month. A common misconception is that paying off your credit card in full is noted on your credit report somehow and automatically/instantly improves your credit. This isn't quite correct, but the real effect this has is similar. See below.
      • Any decision to lend you money is taken based on your previously-established payment habits. Length of credit history is actually more important than your payment history -- your "score" goes up the longer you've had credit established. All sorts of events and ideas change your credit score:
        • A short credit history, of less than five, even ten years, lowers your score.
        • A missed payment (reported on your credit history; note most lenders are willing to forgive one missed payment, in the sense that if you pay it back and pay their fees, they won't report it) lowers your score.
        • Accounts in collection, valid or not, lower your score.
        • "Maxed out" revolving credit lines (carrying a $4,900 average balance on a $5,000 credit card line) hurts your score significantly (it is viewed as very poor money management skills since you keep the card charged up and pay only (or close to) its minimums every month).
        • Always-zero balances lower your score slightly. Here's where normal common sense goes out the window; it's generally a "good" thing to have credit available that hasn't been used, but lenders view it as potential debt you can run up after they've lent you money. It's a risk to lend you money and require a certain payment, knowing that later you could run up another debt with an already-established credit line that could make you unable to pay for this line of credit. This is reflected as a decrease of your score.
        • Having a long credit history but no "old" accounts (as in "card hopping" -- you get a new card every year at a lower interest rate or to take advantage of zero-fee/zero-interest transfers, and close your old cards) lowers your score. Personally I think they do this because it pisses 'em off that you're screwing them out of interest, but the official reason claimed is that you haven't established a long term reliable history with a single lender when you do this.
        • Unsecured cash loans reduce your score. You had to borrow money, one time, from somebody, and you owe it back. The payments rarely c
      --
      Read my stuff.
    28. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh?!

      "Sticking up for our culture" by "buying nothing"? You do realize this country was founded on and is successful because of capitalism, right? Capitalism is a distinct part of our culture.

      Perhaps it should be "buy nothing from corporations" day. Support mom and pops for a day and avoid big retailers.

    29. Re:national buy nothing day by geekoid · · Score: 1

      some banks are now offering the same charge back option with debit as they do with credit card. I think BofA* gives there customers this choice.

      *Bank of America (originally bank of Italy)
      not Bastard operator from Austria.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    30. Re:national buy nothing day by Jetson · · Score: 1

      One more reason to use a credit card: pre authorized
      payments. I *never* give a company access to my bank (chequing)
      account if I have the possibility of having them
      bill my Visa card. The reason is that I can call
      Visa and have a charge refused and discontinue the authorization,
      whereas the banks make it difficult to recover errors (or fraud) and
      insist that the customer contact the billing company to
      have the payments discontinued.

    31. Re:national buy nothing day by razablade · · Score: 1

      I've had my debit card number stolen before and false charges charged to it. I simply told my bank my side of the story and didn't have to deal with it again. No different than a credit card.

      --
      The expression is "I could NOT care less." Think about it.
    32. Re:national buy nothing day by willfe · · Score: 1

      That's reassuring (I have a debit card too, sadly :), but there's still a wrinkle with this.

      When a credit card is stolen, and charges run up, you are temporarily unable to borrow the money that the thief charged to the account. When a debit card is stolen, and charges are piled up, that's real, hard cash you can't get access to until it's cleared up.

      We're talking about an inconvenience (I can't charge my cell phone bill) versus a major problem (my mortgage check bounced because the debit card got stolen and the guy made enough charges to lock up too much of my account's funds).

      Still, it's better than nothing; I can recall the early days of debit cards, when you were just left out in the cold when a card got stolen.

      --
      Read my stuff.
    33. Re:national buy nothing day by vistic · · Score: 1

      I worked customer service for a national department store and also for an internet-centric issuer of visa and mastercards.

      You can't really do this....

      If it's a charge you authorized then you need to cancel it with the merchant. This is so that merchant's don't get ripped off. The credit card company doesn't have the authorization to just cancel a charge that you might have received services for. You must try to cancel it with the merchant first.

      If it's a charge you authorized and never received services for, or a charge you canceled with the merchant and they billed you anyway... then you can dispute it. Also you can dispute it of course if it's a charge you never made and don't recognize at all.

      Also, if a charge is a recurring charge then the credit card company basically can't do anything and you have to contact the merchant because it's sort of a contract you entered into with the merchant and the credit card company can't legally step into that and cancel the charges. You have to contact the merchant.

    34. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD THIS UP +1 FUNNY

    35. Re:national buy nothing day by vistic · · Score: 1
      Second, with a credit card I'm earning interest until I pay the bill. That's called the 'float', and it adds up pretty substantially over time.


      Hmmm?

      I think you mean the bank is earning interest. That's the downside of credit cards, not the upside.

      You earn interest on checking accounts and stuff, since it's basically your money that you've lent in a way to the bank.

      Whereas with credit cards, it's money the bank is lending you. You get charged for that interest.

      I wish there was a credit card that would pay me to carry a balance... but I've never ever seen a credit card offer with a negative APR.
    36. Re:national buy nothing day by SEE · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      Ah, that old myth.

      In fact, the 1773 Tea Act, which provoked the Boston Tea Party, remitted a significant English tea tax. The result was that Americans could buy British East India Company tea after the Tea Act for significantly less than they previously were being charged for either legal British tea or smuggled Dutch tea. And this cheaper tea was of generally higher quality than the Dutch tea, too.

      So what was the issue? The extent of Parliamentary authority.

      The small three-penny Townsend duty was left on the tea by Prime Minister Lord North as a statement of the principle that Parliament could tax the colonies, and the Tea Act granted a monopoly on the tea trade to the British East India Company.

      Even though the result was higher quality and lower prices, the American colonies denied that Parliament had the right to do either. Indignation was high enough that the ships to New York and Philadelphia were ordered back to England by the local authorities, lest the ships be attacked. In Boston, the ship was brought in under guard, and got attacked. Americans continued to drink more expensive, smuggled Dutch tea (and increasingly coffee instead) rather than concede Parliamentary authority.

      Americans did not revolt against Britain because of high tax rates; Parliament never imposed taxes in America even approaching those it imposed in Britain itself. They revolted because they did not accept the King-in-Parliament as the soverign authority in the colonies. While they were subjects of the King, they did not consider themselves subject to the authority of a Parliament in which they lacked representation any more than Britain was subject to the colonial legislatures in which Britain's people did not have representation.

    37. Re:national buy nothing day by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      many stores will give cash discounts on large purchases. Yeah, you or I probably don't pay for new cars with cash (or a credit card), but even for a $1,000 stereo, it's easier to get extra off when paying cash. Of course, with internet shopping, you can probably buy it cheaper online.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    38. Re:national buy nothing day by CySurflex · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it? If you can afford to buy stuff without credit, you don't need one.

      there is one more reason that I think is very important:

      8. Credit card companies charge vendors between 3% and 5% of your purchase. This means that this price is already reflected into your purchase price. If you're buying with cash, the price is still the same (in most cases) and the vendor pockets the difference. If you're buying with a credit card and you're smart about it, you can either get some of that cash back, or get get some of it back in the form of "rewards" or frequent flyer miles.

      Same reason I never use a debit card.

    39. Re:national buy nothing day by larry+bagina · · Score: 1
      My credit union currently has a 36-month signature loan for 10.50%, 60 months for 11.50%.

      For secured car loans, 100% (ie, you pay nothing up front) 24 months is 3.20%, 72 months is 5.40%.

      Their credit card currently charges 10.9% apr - so it would be slightly more convenient and less expensive than an unsecured loan if you wanted to buy furniture, but would be stupid for a car (unless you're going to pay it off entirely the first month... in which case you might as well just write a check).

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    40. Re:national buy nothing day by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

      "Maxed out" revolving credit lines (carrying a $4,900 average balance on a $5,000 credit card line) hurts your score significantly (it is viewed as very poor money management skills since you keep the card charged up and pay only (or close to) its minimums every month).

      Is having a CC balance that fluctuates around 80%-95% because you make large expenditures but also large payments every month considered the same?

    41. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America was founded on capitalism? Go back to school, queermo.

    42. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you can afford to buy stuff without credit, you don't need one.

      Actually, speaking as a mathematically trained person, you have it mostly backwards. If you cannot afford to buy stuff without credit, you really should avoid one. Credit cards will only make you less able to afford things. (Unless you can manage to regularly return to that zero balance that you so look down upon.)

    43. Re:national buy nothing day by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes. Using a credit card account and not having any late payments associated with it establish a track record of being able to send ontime payments, and also the ability to know one's own limits and not make purchases that they can't afford to pay back.

      Lenders are now relying on a score called FICO from the Fair Issac corperation as the benchmark of a consumer's credit quality. The exact formula is kept secret, but it is known that indicators of past payment history contribute 30% of the overall score. If a consumer doesn't have any account that is reporting on-time payments to the credit reporting services, then they will score poorly in that section. Not as poorly as somebody who has a history of skipping payments, but still not as good as somebody who has held on to the same credit card for several years with no missed payments.

      Using a debit card in place of a credit card doesn't create a credit history. The decuction from your account happens instantly, and is rejected if the account can't support the decution... there's no loan involved, so no chance for you to screw up on paying back the loan. Basically, their trust in a new consumer is built up by giving them the chance to screw up, and then giving them more trust for having not screwed up.

      Income and current debt load are also components in the formula, but to get a near-perfect score and therefore the best rates you score well in all of the sections.

    44. Re:national buy nothing day by ShinmaWa · · Score: 1

      No different than a credit card.

      One BIG difference. The protections you enjoy on a credit card are established and maintained by law. The credit agency has no choice but to only keep you liable for the first $50 of the fraudulent charges. There is no such requirement on a debit card. You didn't have to deal with it because your bank decided out of the kindness of its heart (or whatever) that you didn't have to deal with it, not because there was a law requiring them to.

      To put it another way, "you got lucky."

      --
      The /. Effect: Thousands of users simultaneously accessing a site to not read its content.
    45. Re:national buy nothing day by Our+Man+In+Redmond · · Score: 1

      I don't know about anyone else, but I hope to have the major Christmas shopping done by Thanksgiving and just let others "enjoy" the holiday shopping experience. We plan on spending Black Friday hosting a party for our granddaughter's friends, and not going anywhere near anything that looks like a store.

      If you have a chance look up Stan Freberg's classic audio cut "Green Chri$tma$". Yes, that's the official spelling. He released it in 1959 and it's as valid a commentary 44 years on as it was then.

      --
      Someone you trust is one of us.
    46. Re:national buy nothing day by shepd · · Score: 1

      >It's to get you thinking about what the fuck you're doing with your life and the world around you.

      I can do that while shopping, TYVM. Too busy to sit about wallowing on my laurels.

      >Why are you filling your life up with useless shit (made by slave-labor in China)?

      Useless shit like my computer? Like the TV I watch TLC on? What useless shit are you talking about? The stuff I sold? I guess that is useless now, but I don't keep that stuff about.

      >What's the point?

      Furthering the economy thereby furthering society. To not live in trees. To enjoy the fruits of society's labour. Etc, etc, etc.

      >Are you charging it to a credit card that you've never had a zero balance on?

      I don't get credit cards to purchase items (you know, those "Save $5 when you get it on your NEW xyz card), so no. Generally those cards are a rip off. If they weren't, sure I'd do it. Why not?

      >Does it make you feel happier than no-money fun with friends/family?

      Yes.

      >Why is that?

      Because kicking cans down the street lacks the challenge, and doesn't draw my interest. Which is difficult, considering the lack of challenge in finding a good "deal". Also, my friends like to contribute to our economy, so, in general, there's enough disposable income between us to do more than drink water from the water fountain and chat it up in the park. Like doing the same at a bar, but with beers instead of water. Or better yet, taking in a movie. Whatever works. You know.

      You don't have to spend money on "useless" stuff, but it certainly is good to spend it on stuff you want. It helps everyone out.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    47. Re:national buy nothing day by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      It's a violation of credit card contracts to offer a discount for paying cash, because that'd be the same as charging a surchage for using credit. The credit card networks frown on passing the merchant fees off to the consumers...

    48. Re:national buy nothing day by Digital11 · · Score: 1

      Actually, thats not true (at least not where I bank...) If someone commits fraud with your debit card, you're only liable for $50... (Trust me on this, I work for the bank.)

      --
      I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
    49. Re:national buy nothing day by DroopyStonx · · Score: 1

      You'll see this crap in action first-hand if you ever buy a house. They come up with every excuse in the book not to lend you the money :)

      Not exactly true. Credit is bullshit and determining how one gets credit is bullshit and completely nonsensical and inconsistent.

      I think income also has a say so in getting loans.

      Take me, for example. I bought a house last year. At that point, I had absolutely NO credit history and 5 derogatory marks that weren't even valid: companies who are trigger happy and are willing to put invalid "delinquencies" on your credit report. (I think this should be illegal)

      Example: I sent a payment in on time to my phone company. The check was lost in the mail, and two weeks later they put in a collection notice that appeared on my credit report. They didn't even mail me a "late" notice or anything. Went directly to a collection agency. This should be illegal because now, even though I've disputed it, it remains on my credit report for the next 7 years even though it wasn't late (the second I got the notice, I paid over the phone). I always pay my bills on time every month and have never been late. This was the only time.

      All 5 marks on my credit report are like this. One from the phone company, another from a gas company claiming I owe $ from my first apartment who COVERED the gas bill. I later proved this to the gas company, had to pay the $97 anyway because I was buying a house and needed it cleared off ASAP, but the "paid collection" remains on my report even after disputing it. There are others quite like this, but I won't get into those because they're pretty much the same thing except w/ hospitals and landlords losing paperwork.

      That said, I make quite a good amount of money. A friend of mine, while unemployed, went into Best Buy and got approved for an $1800 limit. At the same time I applied, I got declined. I was at my job for over 3 years at the time.

      So... how can I have received a loan for my new house (at a very nice interest rate, no $ down) but it's nearly impossible for me to get a credit card?

      Right now to anyone who reviews my report, it appears that I'm high risk even though I'm not. I always have paid my bills on time and have never done anything "wrong" that would make anyone decline me for a card.

      The whole "credit" system is bullshit and needs to have a complete overhaul, that or they need to start accounting for all the times people are on time with EVERYTHING non-credit related including apartment rent and utility bills.

      --
      We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
    50. Re:national buy nothing day by tetro · · Score: 1

      Credit/Debit Card fraud is one reason some people stick to personal checks. One problem with check cards is that once they're stolen, it's harder than credit cards to deal with fraud. When somebody has access to your debit, they can completely empty your bank account (depending on your bank's security). Credit card companies have more protections since they've been around longer. I've gone through check card fraud so I know it really is a biatch to deal with. My advice is to use your check cards sparingly online.

      --
      .smell my feet.
    51. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous+Coed · · Score: 1

      If you have reasonably established credit, it's not very hard to find a 9.9% APR credit card. Mine is. I get about 10 offers in the mail per week for the same or slightly better. The 18-21% crowd is for what we like to call the "unwashed masses." Credit cards are great if you pay them off every month. If you have a reasonable interest rate, (6 months), large amount loans ($2k+), bank signature loans are much much better than credit cards.

    52. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had my debit card stolen a month ago and $750 was charged to it. I called my bank and they had it back in my account within a week.

    53. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't believe he's against buying things. I think it's just his way of covering up for being a tightwad. Either that or he's broke.

    54. Re:national buy nothing day by rworne · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the California State Government. The DMV allows you to pay fees online with a credit card but charge an additional fee to do so. I also think the IRS has something similar.

      "Note: A $4 convenience fee will be added to the amount shown on your renewal notice."

      Cute. This fee only applies to (online) credit card transactions of course. The flip side is hoping you get an appointment before your license expires or wait in horrid lines.

      I had this problem when I was required to appear this year to get a renewal, though I made it with a few day's leeway. I paid cash, but they got their revenge: I now have jury duty the week of Dec 22nd.

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
    55. Re:national buy nothing day by rhuntley12 · · Score: 2, Funny

      8. You drink alot and use the internet to check where you maxed your credit card out last night. Now you know where you were drinking at, how much that hotel room was, and can piece some of the night togather. Or is that just me?

    56. Re:national buy nothing day by mattOzan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it

      Also for credit card rebates and rewards. Small potatoes, but they add up. My visa gives me 1% cash back at the end of each year. My other visa accrues mileage points for free Southwest Airlines tickets (which are transferrable in an eBay type way...) It's probably a few hundred dollars back each year, which beats paying with cash.

    57. Re:national buy nothing day by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      "Even though the result was higher quality and lower prices, the American colonies denied that Parliament had the right to do either. Indignation was high enough that the ships to New York and Philadelphia were ordered back to England by the local authorities, lest the ships be attacked. In Boston, the ship was brought in under guard, and got attacked. Americans continued to drink more expensive, smuggled Dutch tea (and increasingly coffee instead) rather than concede Parliamentary authority."

      Bull$hit. American colonists weren't protesting British tea for a political statement. Boston was a "den" for smugglers who made their money off smuggling the more-expensive-and-inferior Dutch tea than the British tea. When the East India Company was given a monopoly, the tea was so cheap (even with the taxes) it threatened the livelihood of the Boston smugglers as well as the wholesalers (because the British were cutting out the middlemen Wal-Mart style and the general public loved the prices). This fed into the radical "Sons of Liberty" groups who objected any taxation from Britain despite the fact that Great Britain nearly bankrupted itself defending the American colonies in the 7 Years War (French & Indian War) - and won - since the Colonial militias proved to be worthless (with the exception of "Roger's Rangers") cowards who fled the battles or left to tend to their crops. The Sons of Liberty, smugglers, and others raided British ships, beached them, and even set fire to a Royal Naval vessel. Because jury trials in Boston were made up of the peers of the smugglers (ie. smugglers themselves), the British authorities never could secure a conviction, so the British authorities circumvented the whole deal by holding the trials in Britain proper which alienated the radical colonists further (and that is why we have the right to jury trials in the Constitution today, because of smugglers). Britain was in the hole for something like 173 million pounds pre-1776 because of the 7 Years War. The Colonies got rich while paying less than 2% of their income in taxes on average, while in England, the poor and middle class were paying taxes on things like glass for windows, and on average where paying between 10% and 20% of their income. Ireland was in even worse shape tax wise than that. Then the radical colonists got mad because Britain kept soldiers in the colonies in a time of so-called peace (it was a farce because France was plotting another war to retake Canada AND the British American Colonies) in violation of English law. So the radicals harassed British troops. Today, for those that pay attention in K-12 history lessons, we learn that the nasty British even "quartered soldiers" into common peoples homes, which is a lie as well. The British had the soldiers housed in inns and made the colonial legislatures pay the tab. The inn keepers never protested and they loved the fat checks they received. The only members of the public that actually housed British soliders were Loyalist families who volunteered, unlike what they teach us in schools and what is written in the Constitution (again).

      We also are taught that the colonials loyal to the Continental Congress and George Washington outnumbered the Loyalist colonists by 4/5ths. However, that is a misnomer. 73% of George Washington's Continental Army were made up of recent Irish immigrants, not long-term English and Scottish-descended British American colonists. Compare that number (the 73% which is also not counting the slaves that were also fighting in the Continental Army, something like 1% to 5%) to the 1/5th of the Colonial population who were Loyalist and fighting. That illustrates that the majority of the colonial public sat on the fences waiting for a clear victor to arrive in the struggle. They also don't tell you until at the college level in history classes that Parliament actually offered the American colonies representation in Parliament, but the various politicians sympathetic to the Sons of Liberty persuation resisted the invitation be

      --
      "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
    58. Re:national buy nothing day by shepd · · Score: 1

      >You have to contact the merchant.

      Or "lose" your credit card and ask for a new one. The new number isn't given to the scumbags, and recurring charges bounce forever on.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    59. Re:national buy nothing day by queequeg1 · · Score: 1

      I think the parent was referring to a practice of the credit card company itself, not the merchant with whom the card user is doing business. I believe that Discover would give a cash rebate of a certain percent each month. This had nothing to do with the price charged by the retailer. Similarly, my GM card gives me a 5% credit towards the purchase of any GM car, which is a great deal since there are no annual fees and I pay off my balance every month. Now if I could only pay my mortgage with my GM card.

    60. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans did not revolt against Britain because of high tax rates

      Horseshit. Now that American History is no longer taught in the schools, people are just making shit up.

    61. Re:national buy nothing day by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 2, Funny

      HAHA, I just walked into Best Buy and got approved for 2500 in instant credit to buy a refridgerator.

      I think having a tech job and a high Best Buy card limit should automatically set your credit score to negative, it doesnt get more risky than that.

    62. Re:national buy nothing day by nfg05 · · Score: 1

      Not with my Bank of America Debit Card, 100% Fraud Protection, same as on their credit cards. As long as you report it stolen within a reasonable amount of time, you aren't liable for a penny.

    63. Re:national buy nothing day by keithosu · · Score: 1

      I actual found that getting a car loan was actually harder to get than my mortgage.

      My reasoning: a car is mobile a home is not. So to reposess a car my be difficult if someone is floating around or leaves town. Now a house doesn't move (well, most house don't) so they can kick you out. It may take them longer to reposses it though.

      The easiest credit to get is department store credit. Though, I've found it to be the most evil credit. They may give you 10% off your sale if you sign up for that card today but if you miss a payment or 1 day late you will see no mercy.

    64. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, if I only had to pay 10-20% of my income in taxes today I'd feel filthy rich.

    65. Re:national buy nothing day by orthancstone · · Score: 1

      Well, be happy knowing that 80k+ people won't be buying much due to the fact that they'll be at a football game all afternoon. That's something of a boost I suppose :).

    66. Re:national buy nothing day by canadian_right · · Score: 1
      0. If you CAN'T afford a zero balance you should NOT have a credit card! Have you checked the interest rate on your card recently?

      Only idiots completely lacking in selfcontrol, and with no concern for the future (like a 5 year old who is told he can have a box of cookies if he doesn't eat the three cookies in front of him, but eats the three cookies any ways) run up debts on credit cards that they cannot pay off at the end of the month.

      0.5 Emergencies. Everyone should keep a few months salary in the bank, but if you don't and an unforseen expense comes up, sometimes the credit card is the only resort. ATI releasing a new video card is not an emergency.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    67. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My reasoning: a car is mobile a home is not. So to reposess a car my be difficult if someone is floating around or leaves town. Now a house doesn't move (well, most house don't) so they can kick you out. It may take them longer to reposses it though.

      Not to mention that it's a lot harder to total a house.

    68. Re:national buy nothing day by Belgand · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to go out and buy anything because I plan on sleeping til noon and then sitting around the house all afternoon. Why would I particularly want to go shopping anyway? I mean, from what I've heard it's apparently a terrible day to go shopping filled with vast herds of people out shopping and very little parking. Never saw what the point was myself.

    69. Re:national buy nothing day by Safety+Cap · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's a good one. Also, you sometimes get better warrantee protection with some cards.

      --
      Yeah, right.
    70. Re:national buy nothing day by kg4czo · · Score: 1
      Debit cards can be exceedingly dangerous, namely in that you are not offered the same protections against fraud that you are automatically provided by a credit card. Suppose your card is stolen and someone makes dozens of little purchases so as not to raise suspicion, or gets a fake I.D. with your name on it so he can charge up a storm. If it's a credit card, once you report it stolen, you're not liable for any of the charges made on it. If it's a debit card, real, actual money has been sucked out of your bank account, never to be seen again. Good luck getting that back. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm suggesting it's far more difficult.


      I work for one of the largest ATM processors/debit card issuers in the US. We deal with Pulse, Visa, Mastercard, Shazam, Star, and a multitude of other large credit institutions. I work 3rd shift in operations and also do tech support during my shift. We get alot of calls with lost or stolen cards by cardholders. It's my job to take the report and mark it in our system if it was lost or stolen. We also take down what time they last had their card so that that person is not responsible for any charges made after that time. So your assumption that debit cards aren't covered under the same rules and laws as regular cedit cards is at most false.
    71. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freshman history class, huh. Man that takes me back first year at school away from Mom and Dad the world full of possibilities. Good luck, dude. Study hard!

    72. Re:national buy nothing day by Wakkow · · Score: 1

      If you're a student like me, it helps to build up a credit line for larger purchases later on (like a car).

    73. Re:national buy nothing day by jridley · · Score: 1

      Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it?

      This is a strange question. A card with a zero balance is the PREFERRED situation.

      I know many people who put EVERYTHING on their cards, and pay them off every month. Some use Discover and get a few hundred bucks at the end of the year. Some get tons of airline miles.

      It's very useful to have a card for various reasons; renting cars, hotel rooms, etc. That doesn't mean you have to carry a balance and pay their interest rates.

    74. Re:national buy nothing day by ces · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, if you need to buy a lot of stuff at once (like getting basic furniture for your new, empty house) you will need a loan anyway. You can get it from a bank, but that means paperwork and waiting for the bank's decision. On the other hand, if you have a credit card with a decent limit (mine is $6000) you don't have to deal with the red tape anymore.

      Retailers of big-ticket items such as furniture or appliances often offer their own credit arrangements. Often this will have more favorable terms and be easier to get than a credit card or unsecured bank loan.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
    75. Re:national buy nothing day by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      A mortgage is usually impossible to obtain without previous credit unless you have a significant (30% or more) down payment ready to go.

      Bullshit. I am sick of people spreading this lie.

      Credit companies and banks love to spread this lie and is it 100% untrue.

      if you get a FHA loan, and if you live in the United states and never bought a home before you qualify, you can get one without any credit at all and only 2% down.

      in fact you can get one with a NEGATIVE credit rating and less than 10% down.

      and YES kiddies that is at the low interest rates.

      the only thing that will kick your arse is outstanding debts. pay them off (and the write off's, plus be sure that you paid any judgements against you) and you can get your FHA loan right away.. My credit was royally Fubard by a second divorce and a vindictive bitch. I got a loan 2 years ago at the low 7% rate (at that time that was the low rate) and I had a NEGATIVE credit rating. My stepson (who hates his mother BTW) has NO credit and qualified for the same kind of loan with ZERO DOWN at 6.25% more recently.

      anyone that tells you that a mortgage is hard to get without good credit is a bold faced liar.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    76. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I imagine in a lot of cases things can be cleared up quickly. If the perpetrator doesn't have your pin, they can't just get cash. And if they use your card like a credit card, then the store obviously didn't do a good job verifying identity. That's why I like when places ask for a picture ID.

      I've been the victem of credit card fraud. I had it cleared up, and I was really annoyed, but it wasn't just a phone call and everything was OK. I don't carry credit debt, so it wasn't a big problem, but it did take some time before everything was straightened out.

      Now, if you have a marginal bank account (living paycheck to paycheck, like far too many people), then debit card fraud could cause you a LOT of problems. Even if you have several thousand in your account, it only takes a criminal a few minutes at a place like Best Buy to clean you out. Then, at most banks, there's this period of time where your money is in limbo while they verify the fraud.

      To put it another way, let's say you have $3000 in your account. Your rent/mortgage is $1100, your car payment is $350. You write and send your checks, then someone steals your debit card and charges $2000. Now my bank, bastards they are, first process debits to your account in order of highest first, then they process credits. So let's say both checks arrive the same day - first the process $1100, and you go $100 in the red (overdraft protection). They pay it, then charge me $30 fee. Then they process $350. They refuse it, and charge me another $30 fee. Now the car payment is late ($50) and they have a returned check fee ($50).

      So the bank freezes my account because of the fraud investigation. Now I can't buy food or pay my other bills until they resolve the problem (or you put more money into it). When all is said and done, they credit my account $2000. After enough bitching, they credit my account another $60 for the overdraft charges, but since the fraud is not *their* fault, they won't reimburse me the extra $100 I had to pay the car company. Not only that, but now I get a late payment on my credit report.

      The difference with a credit card, if you wanted to pay bills with a credit card, the companies don't get hit with big bank fees if the card is denied - it's just denied, and that's it. So if you had the same situation with credit, and tried paying your car payment, they would say "it's been denied", and you could say "Ok, I'll get a check in the mail." That is, unless you were doing some sort of automatic billing, in which you might get hit with a late fee, but not a returned check fee.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    77. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      That's pretty recent, though, isn't it? Some people may still be uninformed about changes in the law. I know there were proposals, but I didn't know it was law. Are you sure it's not just your bank?

      Still, while the money is being investigated, it's frozen and you don't have access to it. That's a bit different then your credit being frozen temporarily.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    78. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I agree that the whole credit system is bullshit, it's almost like a pyramid scheme that inflates our economy.

      I have a visa from the same bank I have my checking account. I use the visa to purchase things, for protection and ease of use, and then I can almost immediately go online and transfer the funds from my checking account. No interest, nothing. I don't even know (or care) what the interest rate is, I never pay it.

      But I have to question your mortgage... I'm sure you got a great rate - so did everyone who bought a house recently, but I also have to guess you might be paying as much as a point more than if you had good credit. 6%, for example, is a great rate, but I know someone who recently got a 4.7% fixed rate for 30 years. The mortgage companies have been hungry, so they'll finance just about anyone, but you would probably have gotten an even better rate had you gotten a good credit score.

      I also have to tell you, though, I have a horrible problem with my credit reports. They're mostly good, although I've gone through a lot of credit since getting out of college, so I have dozens of cards on there. All closed, but one, now, but the report is huge. I have a problem with one where there is a Discover account that is open and currently being used. Obviously a mistake (I had Discover, but not anymore). I asked the credit bureau to investigate, and they said "nope, it's valid", even after Discover verified all my accounts were closed.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    79. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Yes, but for how long is your account and the disputed amount of money tied up while they investigate?

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    80. Re:national buy nothing day by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      to get a near-perfect score

      Follow the old adage:

      "To get a loan, you have to prove you don't need the money."
      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    81. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Just because your company does this does not mean that it is the law - it's just good business. If everyone were scared to use their debit cards, then your company wouldn't exist.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    82. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      No, we have both, too. The debit card a lot of the posts are referring to are what you are describing. Many have the visa logo (and the visa hologram), and are used just like credit cards.

      The difference is that if someone steals my debit card and charges $1000, even if the bank will put that back in my account after evaluating the fraud, that money is tied up while they do it. That's my money, or your money... in the case of credit, you'd just have $1000 disputed on your credit limit.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    83. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Although all the contracts I've seen make YOU liable for payment and late fees. So you can "lose" your card, and have it cancelled, only to find some company charging you late fees up the wazoo, finding it on your credit report, and/or being harrased by collection agencies.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    84. Re:national buy nothing day by WinDoze · · Score: 1

      That seems sort of backwards to me. In Massachusetts you get a $5 discount for renewing on-line! The rationale is that you are saving the previous DMV employees' time I suppose.

    85. Re:national buy nothing day by KirkH · · Score: 2, Funny

      the destruction witnessed during the American Civil War wouldn't have happened

      had the American colonies remained a part of the Empire, Britain would've been so strong that the Germans wouldn't have dared fight them (and us) in the 20th Century and World War I and II would've never happened

      Wow. It's cool how you can see into these alternate universes and know the outcomes. I wish I had that power. Revisionist history works both ways.

    86. Re:national buy nothing day by JBatch · · Score: 1

      National buy nothing day is every Sunday for millions of americans.

    87. Re:national buy nothing day by hornrimsylvia · · Score: 1

      i have finished knitting all of the xmas presents i am going to give this year. take that walmart, best buy, and malls! yay for wool and alpaca from peru! knitting is great for coders, you guys should try it. it is sort of punch-card archane methodology, but wonderful for the anal machine language coder inside of us all.

    88. Re:national buy nothing day by (trb001) · · Score: 1

      Amen. My Discover Card gives me 1% back, which may not seem like a lot, but watch what happens when you pay your rent/mortgage on it...1% of ~$1500 is $15. Couple this with gas (~120 a month), groceries, consumer shopping and you have a hefty monthly amount. Also, when you defer payment for a month, you can direct deposit paychecks into a savings/money market account, earn the month's worth of interest and add more money to that savings. It's not a lot in comparison with your annual earnings, but it adds up after awhile...and remember what everyone has always told you about compound interest?

      --trb

    89. Re:national buy nothing day by pclminion · · Score: 1
      1. Buy car.
      2. Sell car.
      3. Use money to pay mortage.

      Sure, you might lose worst case 20% on a car reselling it the day you bought it, but 20% off 5% is still 4%. You won't find a card with cash back at 4%!

    90. Re:national buy nothing day by li99sh79 · · Score: 1
      ill be saving lots of money by sticking with ad-busters "National Buy Nothing Day" on "black friday" and sticking up for our culture.

      I'm not going shopping that friday because...I'll be at work.

      -sam

      --
      I was just here, where did I go?
    91. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went to Wal-Mart one time on that busy day, just to see what all the fuss is about. I'll never again do that. You have to be insane to stand in those lines for that long for stuff that isn't a necessity.

      I can't say I'm an extremist about it, but I do realize that commercialism / consumerism is slowly enslaving us. I've even seen where some fast food places are open on Christmas and Thanksgiving, when their employees should be at home with their families. I now try to fill my tank and pantry before those days, so that I don't have to stop at the store or gas station when those poor people should be at home.

    92. Re:national buy nothing day by OptimizedPrime · · Score: 1

      I asked about that when I was getting my car. A house tends to appreciate over time, so if they repo it after a year it probably worth the same or more. A car takes a huge hit in value when it leaves the lot, so they lose more if they take it back.

    93. Re:national buy nothing day by NialScorva · · Score: 1

      That's just a bad layout of your accounts. My apartment allows a monthly rent charge to a credit card. If my credit card was stolen, then the same thing would happen. If you're truly paranoid about it, you could open two checking accounts, one for spending and one for fixed bills, and set up your direct deposit correctly.

      I lost my Wachovia check card not too long ago. They can freeze the card without touching the account. As far as I can tell from my contracts and whatnot, it's exactly like a VISA card so far as liability goes. The race conditions you describe can happen with any account, not just a checking with check card.

    94. Re:national buy nothing day by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      No, it's not a "bad layout" of my accounts, I'm giving an example of how fraud on a debit card can be much more detrimental than fraud on a credit card.

      Both are bad, both can be remedied, but you don't get returned check charges on a credit card. And that's the whole point - people should be using their credit cards more than debit cards.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    95. Re:national buy nothing day by Slime-dogg · · Score: 1

      You don't *need* a credit card to establish credit though. Payments can be made on anything that you owe, which would include such things as cell phone bills, power bills, cable television / internet bills, rent, the works.

      I just set up automatic deductions for everything, because I'm notoriously horrid at handling paper. It's better for me to spend 10 minutes setting up the billing info for them to hit my debit card or checking account than it is for me to consistently misplace my bill, checkbook, stamps, envelopes, yada.

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
    96. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Why would you bother keeping a credit card with a zero balance on it? If you can afford to buy stuff without credit, you don't need one.

      And if you can afford it only credit, maybe you shouldn't buy it at all. It's called living within your means and not living in debt.

    97. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When somebody has access to your debit, they can completely empty your bank account

      Not without my PIN.

    98. Re:national buy nothing day by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

      Speaking as someone who has an 803 credit rating (that's VERY high to anyone not familiar with the system), having 0-balance credit cards that you never use does in fact help alot.

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    99. Re:national buy nothing day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand how someone who steals your debit card can charge things on it.
      Wouldn't they need your pin number?

  3. Pretty braindead by mousse-man · · Score: 3, Informative

    Using the DMCA to block competitors off selling products you're not even the sole distributor seems be a braindead concept. But then, there are lawyers as well....wasn't there an important sentence in King Lear about that profession?

    At least the Germans have some laws governing sales, so they have some logic in there.

    1. Re:Pretty braindead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are using the DMCA to stop the leakage of information on what special deals they will have, to hinder people who would otherwise hop from store to store and pick up the lose-leader special at each store, possibly simply to re-sell it at a profit on ebay.

      It's braindead, but in these times we have to keep the various braindead corporate attempts straight. Don't get the confused !

    2. Re:Pretty braindead by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Lawyers are only partially brain-dead in that most of their intellect is left intact: I mean, there are some very sharp attorneys out there. However, their brain centers for "social consciousness" and "ethics" are generally smaller and not as well developed as those found in ordinary people.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Pretty braindead by valdis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The average lawyer has a *highly* developed sense of *ethics*. It's *morals* they're lacking. The average lawyer has absolutely no trouble doing something completely slimy and nasty - but will be offended if you even *hint* that he do so in a manner that doesn't follow all the proper procedures and forms.

      Think about it - if there are lawyers involved in an adversarial encounter (as opposed to, for instance, a real estate sale where everybody WANTS the deal to happen), you are almost guaranteed that somebody is going to have something sleazy done to them. On the other hand, if a lawyer at the other end of your state breaks the rules (breaks attourney-client privelege, etc), it makes the news at YOUR end of the state.

    4. Re:Pretty braindead by Pendersempai · · Score: 1
      The average lawyer has a *highly* developed sense of *ethics*. It's *morals* they're lacking.

      You may be right and you may be wrong, but this story has nothing to say about the personality of the average lawyer.

      Because they were doing their job. A corporation is designed to maximize profit, and nothing else. We can wax endless about how great the world would be if they were instead bent on Improving the Human Condition, but the fact is they're not, and the system isn't designed to motivate that. I even question if capitalism is workable if we allow that monied parties hold others' interests sovereign.

      That said, a lawyer is hired to represent the best interests of his client. That is his job. If a law such as the DMCA exists that affords a corporation a financial advantage, it is the lawyer's job to evoke that law.

      If the law was not designed to be used that way, then it is Congress's fault for failing at their job. If the lawyer is using the financial might of the corporation to bury the little guy in court, well, he's still representing the best interests of his client. Perhaps the U.S. justice system should be re-factored to demotivate this sort of behavior. Regardless, don't blame the lawyer for doing what society tells him to do.

    5. Re:Pretty braindead by Aerion · · Score: 1

      Not Lear, actually.

      "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
      - King Henry VI, Part 2, Act IV, Scene ii

    6. Re:Pretty braindead by nullard · · Score: 1
      You might want to do some research on the history of corporations. They were designed to allow a group of people to do something the government wanted done but couldn't afford to do in exchange for limited liability and a time-limited share of the profits. Take toll roads for example. Instead of building an expensive road, the government would give a group of people the authorization to build the road, charge for passage (for a limited time) and be mostly free from individual liability if something goes wrong. The ownership of the road would revert to the entity that granted its charter upon completion of its duties (after the profit-taking). Modern corporations are not the norm.

      Only since the Civil War have we had corporations that focus 100% on profit over benefit to their community, think they have free speech, etc. I believe that most corporate charters today still list the expected societal benefit that the corporation must fulfill its obligations and remain in existence. If the state governments would be willing to enforce the rules set down in corporate charters that they issue, there would be much fewer abuses like those committed by Enron, WorldCom, etc.

      I just found this site: http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/cpg.htm
      One good quote:
      The 1834 Pennsylvania legislature declared "A corporations in the law is just what incorporation act makes it. It is the creature of the law and may be moulded to any shape or for any purpose that the Legislature may deem most conductive for the common good."
      --


      t'nera semordnilap
    7. Re:Pretty braindead by Kindaian · · Score: 1

      Well it all depends on "when" and "how" the prices are gathered.

      If they are gathered AFTER the public use of them in the shelf, or in a "distributed" leaflet, then, DMCA doesn't apply. Published prices are PUBLIC (that has been acerted previously in several other cases).

      If they are gathered using any kind of "pre-publishing" methods (like info tiped by someone at the print-house, gathering a leaflet from the print-house or something like that), DMCA doesn't apply also... because in that case would be other laws like trade secrets, contract laws and the like that would apply.

      DMCA only applies to Digital Medium and only when some sort of Copyright protection does exist. And nope, the CD protections that are in use doesn't apply to DMCA... after all they don't forbit the "copy"... but only the "play"... and only in some devices...

      Alas... America is a great nation... with completly crazy laws..

    8. Re:Pretty braindead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, beat me to it. Just when I thought that expensive English degree was going to be good for something at last... well, get me a funny mod on Slashdot, anyway.

      (Looks like you're still waiting, so I feel a little better.)

    9. Re:Pretty braindead by nyseal · · Score: 1

      They may have a 'sense' of ethics however they're rarely applied. Lawyers know the loopholes and would not think twice about it if meant getting their client off if slipped through the system.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
  4. Is it just me... by joseph+schmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...or does everyone else have a HUGE list of businesses they refuse to do business with?

    And Best Buy DOES seem to have some pretty good prices, too, at least on new-release DVD's...

    1. Re:Is it just me... by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 1

      Yeah so hopefully with this information being public, they will lose money?

      ...or just change the items that will be on sale.

    2. Re:Is it just me... by Champaign · · Score: 4, Funny
      That's usually how I deal with businesses that I feel have behaved irresponsibly or treated me badly as a customer, I stop shopping there.

      The unfortunate side-effect of this is I have to move every few years as I run out of places to buy food, clothes and other necessities of life...

      *BUT* at least I live a principled life! ;-)

    3. Re:Is it just me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it is getting pretty ridiculous.

      The way I see it, its just the lawyers attempting to make themselves useful and maybe get another bullet for their resume that includes the word "DMCA". I can't go around boycotting every business in my area because their legal team is a bunch of morons. Sooner or later I wouldn't be able to buy anything at all! Then where will I be? Not to mention keeping track of it all. You pracitcally need to shop with a PDA so you can check your list before you buy. I think my ThinkGeek shirts are enough geekness for the public.

      I'm basically going to let all companies slide from now on except for Blizzard since they have a long history of stupidity that sticks out in my head.

    4. Re:Is it just me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      does everyone else have a HUGE list of businesses they refuse to do business with?

      Apparently, your list isn't complete, as you are still buying DVDs.

    5. Re:Is it just me... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      It's just you. OK, maybe not just you, but most people don't participate in useless boycotts.

    6. Re:Is it just me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you don't run into any problems with the moving companies...

    7. Re:Is it just me... by Zeelan · · Score: 1

      It isn't just you....

      When I was a teen ager I thought that it would be fun to start keeping a list of places that I couldn't shot at' use' or ever buy anything at again sense I was loosing track. The list is rather long now... but maybe someday it will have an effect. (If the business was a local store and not some national chain it mostly closes after a year or two after making my list.) I think the best part was listing 'why' I as boycotting them for life.

      Classic big names on my list.
      Burger King.
      Pizza Hut.
      Circuit City.
      Nike.
      Rebock.
      ect.

    8. Re:Is it just me... by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      No, everyone has a HUGE list of businesses they complain about on Slashdot and do business with anyway.

    9. Re:Is it just me... by NineNine · · Score: 1

      Yup... My list reads like the Who's Who of the Fortune 500... Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Circuit City, Amazon, B&N, Apple, etc... I stick to buying from local retailers.

    10. Re:Is it just me... by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      I made it to the age of 33 and I only have one store that I feel really strongly I won't ever shop at. That's Sears over something they did to me when I was 19 (the last time I shopped there.)

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    11. Re:Is it just me... by phiwum · · Score: 1

      Yup... My list reads like the Who's Who of the Fortune 500... Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Circuit City, Amazon, B&N, Apple, etc... I stick to buying from local retailers.

      Shame that local retailers typically get their goods from the Fortune 500 companies that didn't make your list. The bigass multinational suppliers are not, I think, any better than the bigass retailers, but they're even harder to avoid.

      Don't take this comment as a reason to stop trying to buy locally, of course. I've always preferred the local retailer, largely because I've found the service friendlier. I like when my shopkeeper knows who I am and what I like, and I've never found that with a big national chain. (Of course, now that I'm in the Netherlands, it takes only four locations to be a big national chain.)

      Oh well, lost whatever point this had. Mark this offtopic, I reckon. (Enough conscience to advocate moderating my own post down, not enough to refrain from posting.)

      --
      Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
    12. Re:Is it just me... by Milo77 · · Score: 1

      thanks to globalization, even if you move to the other side of the world, you'll still be buying food cloths, etc from the same companies...

    13. Re:Is it just me... by cosyne · · Score: 1

      I try to do the same thing, but my fear is that I'll eventually be living in a tent in a dry riverbed. Unless REI starts misbehaving. Then I'll just be living in a dry river bed.

    14. Re:Is it just me... by rworne · · Score: 1
      ..or does everyone else have a HUGE list of businesses they refuse to do business with?

      And Best Buy DOES seem to have some pretty good prices, too, at least on new-release DVD's...


      I don't know about the Best Buy you've been shopping at. Here in Southern California we had Circuit City and Silo come to town with discounted prices and run all the mom & pop discount electronics stores out of business (such as LA Tronics and Adray's). These latter stores are where they really had the rock-bottom prices.

      After these were driven out of business, the prices at CC and more lately Goodguys, Fry's and Best Buy are none other than full MSRP. Do some comparison shopping and see. The only real difference in price is where the price ends in .95, .97, .98 or .99. Sales, when they do occur are authorized by the manufacturer (Sony is notorious for this). Every retailer will have a similar offering or discount on the same items.

      As for cheap DVDs, they used to be really cheap. You could come in the 1st week after the release and get a title for $15 or so for the most popular titles. Very recently some of the retailers (*cough* Fry's *cough*) now only have the title on sale the day of release only - then it's full MSRP. So as an example, T3 was $15.99 on Tuesday, on Wednesday it's full retail at $22.95.

      These stores ruined opportunities for customers to get good buys until the Internet came along. So now they are attacking the Internet. No big surprise.
      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
    15. Re:Is it just me... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      It's only useless to people who don't mind being herded and treated like cattle at places like Best Buy.

      I haven't shopped at Best Buy in going on four years (and even back then it was iffy). It's not useless because my goal wasn't to put Best Buy out of business, it is quite useless because I've found lots of other ways to buy what I want without the crappy customer service of Best Buy. Sometimes I end up paying more, buy not always, and I feel a lot better knowing that the people I'm dealing with are more knowledgeable and consumer oriented than the high school kids who try to sell me a monitor to improve graphics performance, or tell me I need a 2Ghz computer to surf the web.

      It may not be like this everywhere, but the deciding point was one Saturday where one checkout line (out of ten) was open. The line went back through the CDs into the camera section (the layout of this store). I had a handfull of stuff that I just set down and walked out... never been back, although I've heard a lot of horror stories about Best Buy since then.

      So my boycott is not useless - it served it's purpose - for me to avoid such crappy customer service. It's served it's purpose quite well.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    16. Re:Is it just me... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      It's only useless to people who don't mind being herded and treated like cattle at places like Best Buy.

      If your reason for not buying there is that you don't like the way you're treated, it's not a boycott./p>

    17. Re:Is it just me... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Dictionary.com: To abstain from or act together in abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with as an expression of protest or disfavor or as a means of coercion.

      So I am abstaining from "dealing with" BestBuy as an expression of "disfavor".

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    18. Re:Is it just me... by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Whatever. That's a dumb use of the word "boycott."

    19. Re:Is it just me... by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Touche. I, sir, am humbled.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    20. Re:Is it just me... by laugau · · Score: 1

      I blacklist companies but for a period of time. For instance, for minor offenses (a poor sales staff) 3-6 months. For major offences, like a horrible return policy, putting me on a spam list, etc 2 years or until the policy is changed whichever is longer. Finally, for a company that has completely shafted me, they get the death penalty. Right now, amazon is on my serios offenders list for spam and giving my info away to their 'partners' while there are a few local stores that are on my minor offenses list. Toyota is on the death penalty.

  5. Not really fair to disclose this information. by Sheetrock · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Much of a store's profits are made on strategy. When this kind of data is released, it cuts into the ability of a business to price things appropriately to the demand.

    I'm not saying the DMCA oughta cover this, but this is definitely something that can hurt business.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    1. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Trepalium · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just because something hurts business (or profits, rather), doesn't mean it should be illegal.

      --
      I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
    2. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is it also unfair to get several quotes, or search pricewatch to compare prices ?

      Or to wait til you can get a good deal on a used one on ebay ?

      How about having an above average IQ ? That cuts into your usefulness as a consumer also.

      Just because a business thought of a way to make money, doesn't mean actions that make that way look stupid are somehow "unfair". It's just as "unfair" to not let me read all the ads before I go shopping.

    3. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Linux hurts a lot of businesses.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    4. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by t0rnt0pieces · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Much of a store's profits are made on strategy. When this kind of data is released, it cuts into the ability of a business to price things appropriately to the demand.

      Doesn't FatWallet have a right to make money too? Best Buy should have guarded their pricing info better. Besides, you don't think Best Buy sends people to other stores to check prices?

      --
      Karma: Excellent (In Soviet Russia, karma pimps YOU)
    5. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by JayBlalock · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The entire basis of a (more or less) free market economy and its success is the ability of consumers to make learned, rational market decisions which are in their own interest. Advertising today, however, relies far more on trickery, psychological games, and "invisible" price hikes and drops than actually producing a quality product at a competitive price. If it is harmful to Best Buy for just their *prices* to be made public, then it means Best Buy is doing business in such a way that basically undermines the functioning of our economy.

      Much of the reason the system seems so out of wack right now is that it's the company who has the most clever advertising that wins, NOT the one actually producing the best product. And that's very destructive in the long run.

      --
      Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
    6. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by frogsarefriendly · · Score: 0

      Hey, who the fuck cares? You think it's a law that says stores must make money? I fix my own car, that hurts the car mechanic's business. Same thing with a lot of my equipment. So what? Their sales for the day got leaked, boo who. If they don't like it, they should hire employees who won't leak the data or simply not have sales. WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE LAWS!

    7. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AC, I wish I had mod points for you. Too many 'businesses' seem to think that anytime someone does something they don't like, they ought to be able to take legal action against them.

    8. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by k12linux · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Much of a store's profits are made on strategy. When this kind of data is released, it cuts into the ability of a business to price things appropriately to the demand.

      Actually it would cause a business to more accurately price things appropriately to demand. But that's not what they want is it? They want to be able to price things above what demand would dictate so they can have higher profits. In this case they don't even want to do that.. they want to force people into the stores to find loss-leader items so they can sell them the high-profit items along with or instead of the low priced items.

      From what I remember in civics (history/government) class long ago there were no items in the Constitution or Bill of Rights which guarantee businesses high margins at the expense of other citizens. Funny how things which hurt margins (not destroy sales.. but hurt margins) in favor of the rest of society are suddenly becomming illegal in the U.S.

      I own a small business. Current US policies (even legitimate use of DMCA) don't appear to do one bit of good for small business. They only seem to help big business... which already has tons of tax breaks and other benefits none of the rest of us get.

    9. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by drcln · · Score: 1

      Fair?? Reporting prices simply levels the playing field between consumer and retailer, preventing the retailer from profiting from consumer ignorance.

      IANAL, but I have studied the subject of copyright law.

      Prices are facts. Facts are not copyrightable subject matter. An advertisment and its layout might be copyrightable, but a listing of the prices that are, or are expected to be, offered is not copyrightable.

      The DMCA simply provides a mechanism for notice and removal of copyrighted subject matter. That process takes a few days to go through. The companies are well aware of what is copyrightable and what is not.

      BestBuy may just hope that they can buy a few days of consumer ignorance because of the time it takes to go through the removal, consult a lawyer, and reinstatement of content process. They only need a few days for this strategy to be effective. After black friday, it doesn't actually matter much whether a court would find that the posted material constituted a copyright violation.

      --
      your gravity fails and negativity don't pull you through
    10. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      "Prices are facts. Facts are not copyrightable subject matter"

      IAJAM but..... Dictionaries have copyrights on them. So to databooks for most forms of electronics.

      Sure you can't say "Mario cart 64 == 50$" is copyrightable but actual printed material is. e.g. you can't just photocopy the flyers and then sell them.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    11. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Just because someone sues someone over something, doesn't mean it is illegal.

    12. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Advertising today, however, relies far more on trickery, psychological games, and "invisible" price hikes and drops than actually producing a quality product at a competitive price.
      [...]
      Much of the reason the system seems so out of wack right now is that it's the company who has the most clever advertising that wins, NOT the one actually producing the best product.


      Not that I disagree with you on principle, but:

      What about the advertising companies? Their product is advertisement, you seem to not include them in your view of "the economy/the system".

      You know, lots and lots of people have jobs that are directly related to advertisement: Printers that produce them, artists that make them, set painters that work on the TV shows that get us to watch TV so we'll see ads, etc.

      I do not enjoy pop-ups and spam, but I don't mind that my TV talks about cars and deodorant while I'm in the bathroom, nor do I mind that there are pictures of beutifull people enjoying their cars and deodorant on the side of buses or on the wall over the urinals. In fact, once in a while, there is an ad I actually enjoy. Some bank and/or credit card had an ad about baby-carrying birds recently that was genuinly hilarious, and there's this ad for beer these days with a super hot chick in a bikini, that's allways fun.

      P.S. I'm not a consumming whore. I make efforts to avoid being influenced by advertisements: I change channel whenever an ad is clearly stupid, and even when I do watch them (when they aren't painfully dumb), I avoid paying attention to the product being advertised (that is why I'm not sure what the bird+baby ad was selling). I never mention the brand when discussing an ad, unless its to diss the product and company because their ad was stupid and annoying (make 'em suffer financially for making me suffer intellectually).

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    13. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've gotta get me one of these 'rights to make money'.

    14. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by randyest · · Score: 1

      They sure do, IMHO, but it's not going to happen unless they find a spine and use it. Has anyone else checked the fatwallet forums and noted that the "Hopefully FatWallet will stand up for themselves again..." doesn't seem to be happening? Heck, seems to me that Tim from Fatwallet has folded faster than Superman on laundry day, to wit:

      Here's FW's current position:

      Message from the FatWallet, inc.

      At approximately 11PM CST on 11/14/03, We became aware of a D.M.C.A. notification and subpoena from what appears to be the legal firm representing Best Buy Enterprise Services, Inc. (The email appears to have been sent at 5:20PM)

      Due to the late hour and legal counsel not being immediately available, we are taking the action to remove the content we believe the notification is referring to. We ask that FatWallet members do not post further information regarding this matter or links to third party sites containing the information. Under the terms of the D.M.C.A., we will have an obligation to remove such information as we become aware of it.

      We will follow up with legal counsel and take further action as appropriate.

      Thank you in advance for your patience, cooperation and understanding.

      Tim Storm
      President
      FatWallet, inc


      What does the unavailability of counsel have to do with anything, other than as a weak excuse to cave instantly? I mean, it's the same thing as last year, and it's the same DMCA, yet there are thirty-five (35) instances of "content removed" in that thread alone. More in others. Even links to other sites with the balls to keep the info up are being removed!

      FYI, some of the deals sites with spines (so far!) include: slickdeals, Anandtech's hotdeal forum, and Dealcatcher. I've posted the "offending info" in as many places as I can and will continue to do so in hopes that increasing the number of potential defendants will increase the odds that one of them sticks up for sanity in this.

      --
      everything in moderation
    15. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Unregistered · · Score: 1

      Linux hurts a lot of businesses.
      --
      Sick of gentoo zealots throwing plugs in completely unrelated topics? Me too!


      Gentoo is good for buisness.

    16. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      What's the M stand for?

      Anyway, 1) dictionaries _claim_ to be copyrighted -- this is different than whether they actually _are_ copyrighted, 2) facts are uncopyrightable, but a compilation of facts, if the choice of facts compiled, their arrangement, etc. is itself independently creative (alphabetical order isn't creative, for example), may be copyrightable, though this still doesn't protect any of the facts within, 3) dictionaries have a ton of copy in which they define the word, and while it might be subject to the merger doctrine (because there's only so many ways to define the same word) it is the most likely part of the dictionary to be creative.

      And you might be able to just plain copy the flyers (which could only be copyrightable in terms of the pictures, and the layout, and MAYBE the copy) if it were fair use, which should be analyzed under the 4 part fair use test of 17 USC 107.

      But here most likely people are just reporting the essential information -- the prices -- out of the ads, so it is a purely fact based issue.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    17. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do dictionaries have to do with anything? Most of their content is not factual, it's subjective interpretations of what words mean. Somebody has to make up the definition-explaining what the words mean is a creative process.

      If you want to publish your own dictionary you can buy an existing one and change the phrasing of all the definitions, and sell that.

    18. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because someone sues someone over something, doesn't mean it is illegal.

      Obviously not, but it does reasonably raise the question of whether the behaviour is or should be illegal.

    19. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by JayBlalock · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Hmm, that's a good point, but it sort of depends on your point of view. They produce a product which, in the end, really contributes very little to society besides, admittedly, keeping a lot of people employed.

      But anyway, my point wasn't that advertisers need to be gotten rid of - but that the Corporations have no business whatsoever trying to keep accurate and information information out of the media. Widespread proliferation of this sort of stuff (the FatWallet prices) can provide an effective counterbalance to the excesses of tricky advertising, and thus, hopefully bring the system back to a slightly more stable state.

      However, should they ever succeed in quashing people who post information\opinions on their products that they don't approve of, then we're in SERIOUS trouble, because suddenly, the propaganda becomes the only truth that people know.

      It's a matter of maintaining balance more than anything, which is why nothing even remotely like what Best Buy's pulling should be allowed, or even seriously considered.

      --
      Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
    20. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by nodwick · · Score: 1
      I was inclined to agree with you initially. With the rash of DMCA suits recently that seem designed to try to exploit DMCA to stifle competition, I chalked this one up as another thread from the same story.

      However, I actually did end up RTFA and noticed that you can't actually tell how Fatwallet got the info it posted (since everything's now censored out), nor did they post the text of the C&D. Therefore I can't really tell if the information was from publicly-available sources or if the sale prices were "leaked" by an insider or a web site hack. I'd argue that this makes a pretty big difference in how this C&D should be viewed.

      If the prices were publicly available (as I believe most Fatwallet deals are), then the C&D is without merit since the thread would just be a demonstration of one of the great strengths of the internet and capitalism in general: people gathering publicly-available information and figuring out how to profit from it (and sharing it with others, to boot).

      However, if it's the latter case, then Best Buy really does have good reason for going after people who leak information that they never planned to release into the public domain. After all, companies have plenty of reason to keep quiet about future plans -- pricing and future product timelines for chip manufacturers, for example, tend to be tightly guarded secrets because of the competitive nature of the industry, and the company has every right to go after people who leak their information.

      Unfortunately, unless Fatwallet posts the C&D details (or someone chimes in with a mirror of what was in the deleted posts), it's going to be hard to tell which was the case.

      On a final note, regardless of the details, it's probably unlikely that Fatwallet is going to fight it. They haven't said anything yet about this time around, but when Wallmart went after them last year their response was (quoting from the article) "We really have no choice but to delete this post. Wal-Mart has tons of money and there is no way we would even consider fighting them."

    21. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      One of the assumptions of capitalism is that everyone has perfect information about what everyone else is charging.

      FatWallet is helping to make this happen.

      Best Buy are the enemies of Capitalism and the Free Market.

      Trying to think of an appropriate "In Soviet Russia ..." joke to put here.

    22. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by rhizome · · Score: 1

      However, if it's the latter case, then Best Buy really does have good reason for going after people who leak information that they never planned to release into the public domain.

      Right, except they're not going after the people who leaked the information, they're going after the people who publish it. Once it's leaked, it's not a secret, and publishers play no role in this as has been demonstrated in many court cases (cf. Pentagon Papers). They want to shoot the messenger rather than clean up their own house!

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    23. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by whovian · · Score: 1
      Much of a store's profits are made on strategy.

      Last time I checked, profits are made on selling at a higher cost than what you paid. Essentially, profit .eq. strategy.
      --
      To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
    24. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by valdis · · Score: 3, Informative

      (IANAL, and I don't play one on TV)

      Actually, the OP is correct - facts are not copyrightable. Copyright is however held on the *compilation* and upon the *embodiment* thereof.

      17 USC 102 (b) says:
      In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work

      So finding out Mario cart 64 will be on sale and then publicizing it isn't a violation of copyright as long as they don't infringe the artwork/etc of the original. This dog won't hunt.

      Best Buy would be *much* better served by wandering over to 18 USC 1832 and arguing it's a trade secret:

      http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1832.html

      18 USC 1832 (a)(2) seems a slam dunk:

      without authorization copies, duplicates, sketches, draws, photographs, downloads, uploads, alters, destroys, photocopies, replicates, transmits, delivers, sends, mails, communicates, or conveys such information;

      This dog probably *can* hunt, and I admit no clue why Best Buy didn't pursue this unless they know of some reason why it would fall through in court. Best guess I can make is that there's some reason they can't make 1832(a) stick:

      Whoever, with intent to convert a trade secret, that is related to or included in a product that is produced for or placed in interstate or foreign commerce, to the economic benefit of anyone other than the owner thereof, and intending or knowing that the offense will, injure any owner of that trade secret, knowingly -

      FatWallet could probably make the case that since Best Buy is willing to sell the gear on sale, that no injury is incurred because people wait till the sale starts to buy it. If Best Buy is injured because people buy the box at $149, they shouldn't be lowering the price from $179.

    25. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by ClubStew · · Score: 1

      You mean the strategy to lower prices on black friday? Yeah, that's a new one. Not only should Best Buy attempt to copyright that (I mean, how else can they scare others with the DMCA), but they should seek a patent, too! That's a totally original idea and I agree with you whole-heartedly.

    26. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by lwsimon · · Score: 1

      So hurting someone's business is now illegal, eh? So if a compnay that sells hamburger meat finds out in an internal investigation that a murder took place on the grounds of their meat processing plant (and that can't find the body - Honey, does this hamburger taste rigth to you?), and they decide to not tell the public this information, is the person who tells the cops in violation of the DMCA? I mean, it was never supposed to be public knowledge, and it would definately hurt their business. As we all know, this law is flawed - so what can we do about it?

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
    27. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      When this kind of data is released, it cuts into the ability of a business to price things appropriately to the demand.

      If the truth hurts your company, its time to get a new company. Sorry, but them's the breaks.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    28. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by dr_hodad · · Score: 1
      Sorry, but this "insightful" post is absurdly wrong. Read up on your Marx.

      If all consumers had the information to make rational decisions, the profit margin of commodity retailers such as Best Buy would rapidly approach zero. The entire goal of any respectable marketing department is to avoid this trap. That's also why corporations pay "our" government to guarantee the profitability of their business models with the DMCA and its kin.

      --


      -------
      Dr. Hodad
      Black's Beach Tanning Supply
      La Jolla, California
    29. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they do.
      My dad works at Circuit City, and they all know the Best Buy price checking guy.

    30. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Herkum01 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Customer Notice! EULA!

      To all customers entering this store you have access to private corporate information regarding prices for items that available for sale in this store. Any attempt to use this information for you own benefit, by comparision shopping or purchasing of items from a competitor, or to the detriment of this store, can be used against you in court of law as a violation of "corporate trade secrets" via DMCA!

      Thank you and have a nice visit.

    31. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      True...

      However, strategy can be an even more effective tool in RETAIL than other markets. By lowering the price, they are increasing their sales significantly.

      Just because a store has 100 tv's of a particular model, doesn't mean it will sell all of them any time soon; those tv's may stick around for months and not make them much (or any) money.

      However, by decreasing the price just the right amount and at just the right time, they can ensure they sell most (if not all) of those tv's and end up with a higher profit margin. Granted, the profit PER tv is substantially less (and may even be just the break-even point), but this gives them immediate funds, and lets them invest in a newer model of a tv.

    32. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by JayBlalock · · Score: 1
      I suppose it's fruitless to point out that, while Marx did highlight many very valid problems that have yet to be fully addressed or solved, his own solutions to them were also absurdly wrong.

      Nor does your post really touch on anything I said, since my entire point was that sort of information SHOULD be made public so that the corporations cannot entirely take over. That they're working in their own personal best interests does not negate the idea that they're working against the best interests of your system.

      So, in short, did you in fact have A Point, or were you just looking for an excuse to drop Marx's name?

      --
      Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
    33. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Yes, but when Best Buy sends its people out, they usually enter the competitor's stores while they're open... this is Best Buy trying to keep information that belongs in the back room locked in the back room. Their future moves are trade secrets.

    34. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While you're shopping on E-Bay, you might want to consider getting one of these as well.

    35. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      These are not Best Buy's prices, yet. They will be on the day after Thanksgiving, if everything goes according to present plans. Today's prices are displayed in their stores... but these future prices don't become public info until newspapers go out on Turkey Day.

    36. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, the prices check YOU!

    37. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by pentalive · · Score: 1

      Is'nt the difference that when you go to pricewatch or you just go t a store and look, or you get price quotes over the phone or internet, you are looking at a price as PUBLISHED by the store Vs. FatWallet who gets the **UNPUBLISHED** price for you from employees who leaked the price BEFORE it was public.

      Obdisclaimer - This is a wrong use of DCMA.. but the stores do have a right to keep the prices they have not published yet secret.

      I work in retail (yachk!) and I have had to sign papers about blabing pre-published prices, I could be fired.

    38. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Epistax · · Score: 1

      When this kind of data is released, it cuts into the ability of a business to price things appropriately to the demand.

      This is one thing that is gotten me for the longest time. Companies often price arbitrarely, not according to supply and demand. Ideally they are supposed to price such that the amount sold equals the amount is/can be produced.
      (watch me get sued for saying this) A certain type of printer paper (photo quality, perhaps?) costs about $7 from Best Buy. An employee of Best Buy only has to pay a small % above what Best Buy paid for the product. How much does this paper cost for them? About $2.
      Who in their right mind thinks that a 350% profit is at the equilibrium position of the supply and demand curve? What most companies fail to realize is that demand is a function of price. I won't buy Nike sneakers, not if I make a seven figure income. Why? It's a very crappy deal. (Oh yeah for them the entire price of a pair of sneakers is around $10, that includes everything from construction to shipping to paying everyone to maintanence on every piece of machinery used, etc).
      If you don't think price effects demand, consider baseball tickets, and movies. Players / actors demand more money. Tickets / food costs more. Bust.

      If businesses want to complain about others destroying them, maybe they should stop themselves first.

    39. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Ydna · · Score: 1
      What about the advertising companies? Their product is advertisement...

      No, the product that an advertising company sells are the eyeballs that see the advertising. They sell them to the companies that want to sell goods to those eyeballs. Granted, there are third-party firms that create the advertising material for the vendors, but it's the advertisers that "deliver" viewers to the vendors.

      --

      "The great thing about multitasking is that several things can go wrong at once." -me

    40. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I own a small business. Current US policies (even legitimate use of DMCA) don't appear to do one bit of good for small business.

      Quite to the contrary, current US policies are helping small businesses get fucked. And speaking as a college student, I can tell you that some of us can use all the help we can get.

    41. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess they should have kept them locked up better; They're not secret anymore.

    42. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advertising today, however, relies far more on trickery, psychological games, and "invisible" price hikes and drops than actually producing a quality product at a competitive price

      Funny you say that. I was shopping for a new car not long ago, and it came down to a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry (both decent, reliable cars). After taking a Camry for test drive, the salesman (from Tony Graham Lexus Toyota in Ottawa) refused to give me a price unless I agreed to buy. I said, "How can anybody spend over $30,000 without knowing what they're paying?" He still wouldn't give a price ... after 5 minutes of this, I got up and left. I ended up buying an Accord, and sent the salesman & his manager a copy of my sales contract with a note - this could have been your sale if you would give me a price.

      P.S. Friends of mine have bought cars from this dealer, and had much better service. I probably just got the biggest jackass of a salesman.

    43. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoever modded this guy up to a "3" is an absolute freakin' moron. Really. There is nothing coherent being said here and the economics/logic of it is childish and outright WRONG. (shakes head)

    44. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by russotto · · Score: 1

      They don't use the trade secret law for two reasons

      1) No automatic DMCA gag order. They can send a cease-and-desist, but FatWallet obtains no protection by obeying it, so they have no reason to do so.

      2) Trade secrets aren't mentioned in the Constitution, so if they were to try to sue, the First Amendment might just get in the way.

    45. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      The DMCA's must-takedown-now clauses might not have been the proper thing to invoke, but it's clear that if FatWallet were to leave up the posts in question, they could accused of distributing trade secret information that they could not possibly possess by legal means at this time. Compling with BB's wishes is the easy way out, because this would be a testcase that wins the battle of the DMCA but would overall lose the war of keeping FatWallet and money together.

    46. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by nyseal · · Score: 1

      So make the rubble bounce. It's about time we started over anyway.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    47. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by valdis · · Score: 1

      Hardly likely to make a First Amendment right to distribute trade secrets, there's plenty of case law for that. There's some wiggle room if an investigative journalist uncovers stuff that's potentially a major impact on public health/safety sort of issues - I doubt a judge would see "stuff will be on sale next week" as qualifying (now, if FatWallet had found evidence that next week's sale price was a "reasonable" price and BestBuy had colluded with other outlets to fix the prices $40 higher, *then* you'd have a case.

      Or to comment on another current case, the *only* reason the people who are currently mirroring the Diebold documents have any legal standing *at all* is because they're claiming a "fair use" exemption based on the fact that said documents have information regarding the security of elections, which has a public-interest angle that far outweighs Diebold's copyright claims.

    48. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      No, the product that an advertising company sells are the eyeballs

      Your worldview is both wrong and discusting.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    49. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by WNight · · Score: 1

      In the ideal capitalism, according to Smith and other economist/philosophers, there are inefficiencies. Those transactions which don't increase the ammount of real goods. It's also assumed, in the same way that physicists assume spherical sheep, that consumers have perfect knowledge. In other words, if one product is better than another (for whatever measure), the consumers know.

      In this ideal economy, advertising is an inefficiency in two ways. First, it's just a cost that is paid to do business. It's like shipping, or warehouse space, it's not the creation cost, or profit, so it's something to try to optimize out. Second, it's inefficient in the sense that most advertising isn't "we exist and our specs are x, y, and z.", it's "We're the #1 product on 'Real Sounding, Yet Useless Scale of Measurement'! Our TCO is 1/10th that of product Foo, and we brighten your teeth while you sleep!" That sort of marketing doesn't help consumers find the best product, it tricks them into buying a substandard product for more than it's worth.

      Assuming we could give people a way to actually judge products based on real specs, we could do away with the need for marketing. We'd pay less and probably get better products.

      And this is what sites like FatWallet provide. A way of knowing the lowest price for a given product, and usually, links to independent reviews so I know the worth of the products. Best Buy is an inefficiency. They exist just as a middle-man, no value added. And they try to trick me into shopping with them... Guess which one helps the economy more?

    50. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by WNight · · Score: 1

      What helps the economy? Someone using a computer to run a lathe and create a real product, or someone using a CAD program to design something, or these people paying for software that merely lets them work?

      Microsoft Windows (and Linux) are just middleware. You don't use an OS, you use programs that require an OS. The OS is just there because you can't run Photoshop directly.

      Middleware, and middlemen services like shipping, advertising, retailers, are inefficiencies. If they didn't exist and creators could deal directly with customers, the economy would be more efficient. Less work would be done to create the same number of goods.

      Linux lets a business create software and not worry about the OS, and not require a $500 server OS for their customers to run their software. It lets businesses take ignore yet another middleman.

      Just like the internet is letting people buy music directly without retail store, and soon, without iTunes, straight from the artist. That means the people who make the music happen will get more money and businesses that thrive by restricting access to prime retail spots in physical stores will go away.

      Linux, and other things that lower barriers, are the best thing that real productive businesses could hope for.

    51. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work at best buy, and I can tell you, we sure got a lecture today about it. Fact of the matter is, this information was posted without best buy's approval. This information is not public, and is only available to best buy employees who have been told to not tell anyone about it till the day after thanksgiving.

      So Fatwallet obviously got it from some dubious source who should not have said anything to begin with.

    52. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1
      Dude. I'm a Linux user and advocate. I'm sorry you wasted your time preaching to the choir.

      The point of my post was that the grandparent asserted that the actions taken by whatever company is releasing Best Buy's pricing strategies are hurting Best Buy's business, and by saying "Linux hurts businesses too," I was challenging that viewpoint. Kind of like "Linux hurts businesses...does that mean Linux should be shut down or something?"

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    53. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by taperkat · · Score: 1
      "you don't think Best Buy sends people to other stores to check prices?"

      BBY HAS A THING ON THEIR COUNTERS where they say they do. Constantly. Daily. Whatever. How ludicrous.

      I think I'm baking cookies for gifts this year.

      --
      "But I can't get an ocean that's deep enough for my day..." ~The Frames, "Fitzcarraldo"
    54. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by russotto · · Score: 1

      Of course there's a first amendment right to distribute trade secrets. Not to obtain them, perhaps, but to distribute them once you have them falls quite definitely under freedom of speech and/or of the press.

      The Diebold case really is a copyright case (one which reveals one of the many problems with copyright in general, though) and not really relevant.

      Best Buy is claiming a copyright on uncopyrightable information in order to take advantage of procedures which are not available in trade secret cases. About the only way that crap is going to stop is if someone stands up to them and refuses to remove the information, and gets sued, and wins. Not likely to happen because of the unevenness of the stakes (getting bankrupted versus not getting to censor prices) and the unevenness of the "war chest" (Best Buy: millions, threatened sites: diddlysquat).

    55. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by WNight · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, I'd just finished reading a discussion with a guy who basically believed in the broken windows fallacy. You know, as long as people are being paid, the economy must be efficient.

      Your post seemed to be a serious continuation of that instead of a sarcastic comeback.

    56. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1
      Could you explain more? I was under the impression that the broken windows "fallacy" was that if you, for example, clean up graffiti in a bad neighborhood, you'll prevent more violent crimes. I was also under the impression that this worked.

      Could you please enlighten me here?

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    57. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by WNight · · Score: 1

      I just googled for details. There's a broken windows *theory* which is what you're thinking of, and a fallacy by the same name which is what I was talking about.

      And yeah, the theory is that if you let a building look run down, and don't repair the broken windows, people will feel free to break more, etc. If you keep it up, repairing damage, people will be less likely to vandalize it. And yes, the evidence does seem to support this.

      The fallacy that I was talking about is "But doesn't it help the economy if I go around breaking windows, because it employs the people who replace them?". The question can also be asked "Are wars good for the economy?" The fallacy here is that new windows don't actually help anyone. You're no better off than before and as such, have to raise your prices to cover your extra costs.

      Funny that there are two similarly named things, and that they're so different.

    58. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, system has perfect information about YOU!.

      In Soviet Russia, it is said, "This is the store with no bread. The store with no meat is across the street."

  6. No scans? by saikou · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I always thought that prices per se can't be copyrighted. Now situation when people post scan of upcoming ads (which was not the case with BestBuy and FatWallet) can probably fall under copyright violation, as only author of that page can lawfully distribute it (short of posting it with design/layout critique and "never use this font in publication" kind of thing :) )

    In this particular case it's not worth it anyways, as most of the deals were easily available from other retailers for about the same price. It would be good though, to finally get those lawyers into the court and get a precedent of them being slapped with "No can't do" decision. That way any upcoming price-related DMCA cases would be still-born :)

    1. Re:No scans? by evilWurst · · Score: 1

      "Now situation when people post scan of upcoming ads (which was not the case with BestBuy and FatWallet) can probably fall under copyright violation, as only author of that page can lawfully distribute it (short of posting it with design/layout critique and "never use this font in publication" kind of thing :) )"

      I believe advertising does (or should) fall under looser copyright rules in that case, since it's ADVERTISING and the copyright owner WANTS it seen by as many people as possible. They've paid money to get people to see it, they can't logically argue that only some people are allowed to see it.

    2. Re:No scans? by Danse · · Score: 1

      You're right, and Best Buy is full of shit, but hey, they've got lots of lawyers and this gives them something to do. They'll prolly lose, but if they can make someone's life a bit more miserable by trying anyway, then it will have been worth it.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    3. Re:No scans? by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      At this point, the disputed info isn't a price. The prices of the items today or in the past are what can't be copyrighted, but this information is a price from the future that hasn't been released yet. You don't need to sign an NDA to walk into a store, but you do have to if you have the Black Friday prices this early. Clearly, somebody leaked. Therefore, the stores should have the right to contain the breach by not allowing that info to be republished any further.

  7. Re:YUO FAEL IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a troll but the grandparent isn't?

    Stupid pot smoking mods.

  8. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Feynt · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Is it the primary purpose of society/government/law to protect business?

    What about the rest of us, who are 'merely' people, and not incorporated profit-driven organisations?

  9. Interesting... by Tarivus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At first read I thought to myself "What the hell?!" but now that I sit back, chug my daily dose of caffeine, and think about it, I wonder if maybe Best Buy is in the right and has an interest in keeping their items and prices under their hat.

    As said above, releasing such data would cripple Best Buy's ability to price and stock their items strategically. But on the other side of the coin, I believe BB would benefit much more by having the data released to a limited degree and allowing people to at least see WHAT will be on sale. If I wanted a new notebook all year (I do... Christmas gifts anyone? =P) and saw that BB had the model I wanted on sale, I would be inclined to stop in and see just how much cheaper it would be.

    In the end, BB has a vested interest in keeping the exact prices secret, but can benefit from the releasing of rough item descriptions and price deductions. Also, the negative publicity they would get from this would just be shooting themselves in the foot and making them seem like they have something valuable to hide.

    I wonder... if they want to keep the sale information secret, will BB have big men in suits standing at the door searching for camera and writing utensils as individuals walk in and out? ;)

    --
    Thinking outside the box is so big now that doing so is really putting youself back in the box. There is no box.
    1. Re:Interesting... by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 1

      They might enjoy the right to privacy if they can convince the courts that the prices in their store are classified national secrets or something, but I'm afraid that price information for a "big sale" doesn't quite cut it. If some stockboy decides to release their prices, they don't have much of a leg to stand on.

      On the other hand, the website in question (which was involved in this during the last go-round I believe), is probably enjoying the extra attention and big spike in viewers that comes from this sort of trouble.

      What they should be doing is exactly the same thing that Google does when they get a takedown notice - post it in full, including the itemized list of everything that they're being requested to remove.

      --
      "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
    2. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They probably would benefit from keeping those prices under their hat. They would also benefit from being able to force customers to shop only at their stores, but they have noone they can try to sue to reach that goal.

    3. Re:Interesting... by Tarivus · · Score: 1

      Alright, possible benefits aside, it is a litle on the weird side that BB is crying foul and running to the courts over their prices. Maybe BB could lose something from having the information released but that is the risk of running a semi-public, well known chain. Anyone could walk in, see that they're selling a notebook for $900, tell a friend and there you go. But that actually helps them.

      My original point was to possibly put into perspective why BB was doing this. If we look 100% at the legal implications, it would be another step for the DMCA juggernaut. In the grand scheme of things, putting another 3 turkeys on the BB CEO's table is not as important as preserving our rights and freedoms.

      --
      Thinking outside the box is so big now that doing so is really putting youself back in the box. There is no box.
    4. Re:Interesting... by crayz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And if our government's sole function was to ensure the highest possible profits for Best Buy, you'd have a point.

      Instead, as a poster pointed out earlier in this topic, our economy is more or less based on free market principles. The foundation of the free market is the ability of the members of that market to be able to make informed decisions about their economic choices(e.g. buying something). By saying that Best Buy has the right to prevent people from sharing information about its prices, you are implicitly tossing out a free market in favor of a "lets make the rich richer" market.

      Wonderful

    5. Re:Interesting... by smiff · · Score: 1
      I wonder if maybe Best Buy is in the right and has an interest in keeping their items and prices under their hat.

      Who cares what Best Buy's interests are? I have an interest in executing anyone who critices me. Does that mean I have the right to do so? No!!!!!

      The point here is that Best Buy is trying to censor information they have no right to censor. Bust Buy can not invoke the DMCA unless they have a copyright on the content they wish to control. Facts (e.g. prices) are not copyrightable. Bust Buy knows they have no case. They are simply hoping that FatWallet naively caves into their demands.

      The bar for sending out DMCA takedown notices is too low. Takedown notices have real effects on real people's lives. Corporations should face some consequences when they file illegitimate notices.

    6. Re:Interesting... by Tarivus · · Score: 1

      I'm not beyond changing my opinion, so let's review everything here.

      The key point here is wether the prices they set for a sale are their own intellectual property or are open facts. I believe that since the price tags are on the shelves, they would lean more toward facts but, with a good team of lawyers and a slanted judge, BB might with such a case.

      So, assuming the prices are open facts that are accessible to anyone, the case then becomes "Best Buy's Interest VS Freedom of Speech," That is an open and shut case.

      Let us assume that Best But can somehow flag their prices and sale information as private property, then the issue becomes "Best Buy's Interest and Copyright VS Freedom of Speech," That is a much greyer area.

      The synopsis of the entire debate is that. From here it becomes a matter of opinion as to wether Best Buy has the right to call their sale information Private Intellectual Property. I think... yes if they changed their practices in such a way that they would be hurt far far more than this little spat over a website is hurting them.

      So yes, in that new light I see your point.

      --
      Thinking outside the box is so big now that doing so is really putting youself back in the box. There is no box.
    7. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without commenting on BB's ability to price and stock their items, what does the DMCA have to do with at all???

      It looks to me like it's just another large corporation abusing the legal system (not that the DMCA even *belongs* in the legal system...)

    8. Re:Interesting... by Unregistered · · Score: 2, Funny

      And if our government's sole function was to ensure the highest possible profits for Best Buy, you'd have a point.

      Ecactly. Since it's sole function is to ensure the highest profits for the Record Labels, the law doesn't apply here.

    9. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that a free market (ha!) relied on perfectly (or nearly-perfectly) informed consumers. Disabling our access to information doesn't seem reasonable in that light.

      True, they can get higher prices that way, but the free market is supposed to be about competition. E.G. prices so good the competition CAN'T do better...

    10. Re:Interesting... by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      "I wonder if maybe Best Buy is in the right and has an interest in keeping their items and prices under their hat." When you say this you sound like you are saying "I wonder if maybe Best Buy is in the right because they have an interest in keeping their items and prices under their hat." Maybe they have an interest, but that doesn't imply that they are in the right. Let me say this though, it is retarded to boycott Best Buy over this if they succeed. Get the fucking laws fixed, the people at fault are the people who passed this law (the DMCA) and by extension the people who put those people into power (the populous).

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
    11. Re:Interesting... by Sabalon · · Score: 1

      In my experience, best buy can't stock items strategically...unless the stragety is to never have anything in stock. I don't know how many times i've gone in there to get something advertised in a flyer or not. They have the floor model and a spot on the shelf for where the item should be.

      And to add on, even if they did have it, there'd be a mail in rebate.

      I have a $100 gift card from best buy, had it since last xmas. I really can't get myself to go in there to try and spend it. Either what I want costs much more, it isn't in stock, or it seems a waste of money.

    12. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I don't get is why you people want to look at businesses like they are real people. Get over it, we don't owe them anything. They are selling other peoples products for a profit.

      Witness the civilization we've built for ourselves. You have these f***s here, killing those f***s, no one even knows which f*** killed which F*** first, just that they are f***s, and they kill the other F***'s, even when those f***s didn't have a thing to do with killing them in the first place!

      Then our aristocracy/corporatocracy/facist government. I mean,you all eat this pasta out of a box that sits on a shelf for 6 months. I'm pissed at all our ancestors for not telling barilla and the rest of these people to take their pasta and shove it right you know where. Fresh pasta is way better than this junk off the shelves, our ancestors ate it, made it rather, but now, we've all been brainwashed into thinking processed mac and cheese is an acceptable diet.

      of course BB has vested interest. That doesn't mean it should be my vested interest or the governments vested interest. Lets face it, we've retarded our entire culture down to some shiny yellow metal, and 85% of us are willing to screw someone else over to get more of it. The question is, why should businesses be protected when they are doing the screwing, and I get sent to jail when I screw them over? Can we still advertise how to get a free ride in a police car?

      I already stopped shopping at BestBuy because, they have jacked up inflated prices, their sales reps just lie lie lie, I stood there and listened to this kid tell this old man that he would get better quality DVD's from his DVD burner, with the new ATI-Radeon 9800. what the fuck These people are here to take advantage of you. They are NOT the best buy. I've seen it at multiple stores, from multiple sales people. They must encourage it or something.

      My parents went out and got a dishwasher there. The thing comes. We open it. These fucks had cracked the side, and yet, put tape over where it was broken? I mean really. wtf. Then they told us they wouldn't refund the shipping charge. My mom started talking shit, and they refunded their money, but, fuck best buy. Fuck the DMCA.

      Best Buy does not care about me, and I do not care about Best Buy. This country has now become a cess-pool of litigious bullshit and it's not going to end anytime soon. I want out of here now. Unfortunately, I'm not done with school yet. I like northern california a lot, but I don't feel this is the land of the free any more. It's the land of the free if you can afford legal counsel.

      It's sickening that he only reason this stuff is even considered 'illegal' is because it's online. Anyway, I think you should all post whatever the fuck you want online. If they subpoena you, do not listen. If they send the police to your home, tell them to fuck off. Then buy a rifle. Shoot in the air. They won't have anywhere to put us all, and they will have to change their laws.

      Stop buying things at stores all you want, it's already gone to far. Nothing short of another revolution will turn this place around now. Corporate interest has fully saturated those in power. Everything now is centered around money. Small surprise that those in government will support anyone or anything as long as they stand to gain from it. And they have no reason to change the system now.

      Strangely, this reality is very comparable to the idea of the Matrix. Things like this happen, and for the most part your life is no different than it was the day before. But, it is like we are only kept content so that we stay plugged in.

      The people who aren't plugged into 'the system' are 'terrorists'. I mean really, don't you think Neo, Trinity and Morpheus would be lableled terrorists and cop-killers by our government and news media? Just the other day, I saw a report about 'snipers' killing peoples pets. They then went on to talk about a guy who stuck a silenced pistol out his truck window and fired it at something. Maybe I have

  10. Re:YUO FAEL IT! by bhtooefr · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Yes. The grandparent of your post is offtopic, whereas the parent of your post is troll or flamebait (this is why we need a disgusting mod - too much kiddie porn and goatse on /. lately).

  11. Re:YUO FAEL IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the grandparent post didn't deserve a modding down?

    I don't get it.

  12. Same thing as last year? by cK-Gunslinger · · Score: 4, Interesting


    I still have my response emails from Target, Wal-Mart, and Best Buy from last November/December when the same thing went down. They basically said, "Our prices are designed to help our customers save money and these 'hackers' are violating your rights as a consumer as well as ours. We shall defend ourselves by any means neccesary"

    What a joke.

    1. Re:Same thing as last year? by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The connection is this. The "doorbuster" specials you see on the morning of Black Friday are loss leader selections designed to get you in their store first that day, in the hope that you'll make other purchases where all things are equal between all stores with them since you're already there.

      If other stores get wind of the loss leader selections with time to react, and duplicate them, suddenly all of the punch of the loss leader is lost. If everybody knew everybody's loss leaders ahead, there'd be no point in having them so they'd go away and return back to regular market pricing.

      Remember, the definition of a loss leader is a product that the store is intentionally losing money on as one of the ultimate motivators to get people to come to the store. This is one of the few times in your life you'll ever be able to buy at retail something for less than it costs at wholesale. Be nice to the stores when they're doing this... having laws protect the secrecy around Black Friday is needed if you want to have another one next year.

    2. Re:Same thing as last year? by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Our prices are designed to help our customers save money and these 'hackers' are violating your rights as a consumer as well as ours. We shall defend ourselves by any means neccesary

      Evidently, "any means necessary" doesn't include decent OPSEC where the price lists are concerned, or else the lists wouldn't get out to FatWallet in the first place. :)

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    3. Re:Same thing as last year? by hetairoi · · Score: 1

      If everybody knew everybody's loss leaders ahead, there'd be no point in having them so they'd go away and return back to regular market pricing.

      Yeah, cause God forbid these companies actually have to compete based on quality of customer service.

      Be nice to the stores when they're doing this..

      Oh, thank you ConHugeCo, for jacking up prices 300% so that you can drop them 50% and call it a sale!

      --
      you're all figments of my deranged imagination
    4. Re:Same thing as last year? by Ykant · · Score: 1
      I don't have a problem with people or companies making money. That's fair - you provide the stuff, I pay you for it. But would it break them to be consistently reasonable in their pricing?

      Example - someone noticed that people like to buy things on sale. Now, you have department stores where they show you the "regular" price, and then you have "their" price. Everything's on sale, every day. But is it really?

      having laws protect the secrecy around Black Friday is needed if you want to have another one next year.

      I don't care about having another one next year. What I'd rather have is a chance to shop without all of the trickery that makes "Black Friday" necessary in the first place.

      --
      Spelling, grammar, punctuation? We need something that checks logic.
  13. This is a good thing, really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    i have to laugh to myself every time i see Big Business using the DMCA to inhibit competition, filter innovation and silence people talking about pricing rumors.

    It's silly things like this that further illustrate that the DMCA is a Bad Thing(tm).. it's this kind of evidence we'll need when it comes time to take it to SCOTUS

    *prays*

  14. Can somebody refresh my memory by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    What's the legal justification/argument for this? I don't see how you could hope to apply the DMCA here, but then again I've read the law is hopelessly vague so I guess anything's possible.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Can somebody refresh my memory by JayBlalock · · Score: 1
      Generally, getting these prices means trolling their websites and looking for pages which have been uploaded but not yet linked-to. If it's HTTP Secure, that means it's encrypted. Therefore, in a REAL stretch of the legal imagination, it's illegally accessing encrypted information.

      It occurs to me, however, that Fat Wallet could reverse-DMCA them. Before you can get to their actual prices, you have to click through a screen that says something like, "The information contained on this site is licensed for use only by private individuals. Commercial use or access of these pages are strictly prohibited. This content is encrypted. If you certify you are a private individual who intends to use this information for non-commercial purposes, enter the decryption code below to enter the site." Then stick the rest of the content on HTTPS servers so it's sent out in encryped form.

      At that point, if a Best Buy representative continued on to view the material, and admitted to doing so, you would have at least a marginal DMCA claim against them. Since prices have been ruled to be public information time and again, they couldn't really claim to have any justification. It would probably be shot down in court, but you might be able to at least pester them into leaving you alone.

      --
      Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  15. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it the primary purpose of society/government/law to protect business?

    The primary purpose of government/law is to further the advancement of society; but unfortunately sometimes we lose sight of that.

  16. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The parent says that what FatWallet does hurts businesses...and you extrapolate that by his argument, the government exists to protect business interests.

    I'm sorry, but you really jumped the gun there. He didn't say that using the DMCA in such a fashion was right (in fact, quite the opposite). He just said that businesses do have a legitimate concern in this case.

    Most corporations really aren't evil. The government does protect them (read: not the primary purpose), but that's because most businesses do a huge public service. The rest of us work for those businesses. Who else would we work for?

    --
    Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
  17. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by stubear · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Is it the primary purpose of society/government/law to protect business?"

    Not exactly but it is their responsibility to foster a healthy economy and promote jobs for its citizens. If a company is not doing well then the economy will be affected and jobs will be lost so in a way it is the primary purpose of the government and laws to protect businesses.

  18. robbIE uses whoreabully infactdead PostBlock(tm) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    devise, to quash news of the creators' newclear power, planet/population rescue initiatives? not surprising eye gas?

    don't worry about phonIE corepirate nazi MiSinformation/censoring devices, such as va lairIE/robbIE's whoreabully infactdead (not working at all) PostBlock(tm) devise.

    for example:
    --Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, comment posting has temporarily (forever, if we knew what that meant) been disabled. If it's you, consider this a chance to sit in the timeout corner. If it's someone else, this is a chance to hunt them down like with fuddles' corepirate nazi bouNTy hunters ?pr? scams. If you think this is unfair, we don't care.--

    consult with/trust in yOUR creators... get more oxygen on your brain. seek others of non-aggressive/positive behaviours/intentions/motives. get ready to see the light.

    couldn't be simpler?

  19. Tough for Best Buy. by Maul · · Score: 2, Informative

    Seriously. I don't see how their "secrets" of what items are going to be on sale at what time should be priveledged information. They should do a better job of keeping their secrets if they don't like it.

    On the other hand, maybe if I find out (hypothetically) that the printer I was going to buy tomorrow at Fry's will be 20% less at Best Buy, I'll wait to shop at a Best Buy.

    --

    "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

    1. Re:Tough for Best Buy. by cK-Gunslinger · · Score: 1


      This is very analogous to the current MPAA issue. Insiders can't be controlled/trusted and kept from releasing information early, so instead, the 'victim' just stretches the hell out of existing laws and lets their lawyers clean up the mess. Laziness, plain and simple.

    2. Re:Tough for Best Buy. by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 1

      If you do find something cheaper at another store after you already bought the item, you could always return it (save your receipt like a good little consumer would). It seems like Best Buy is forgetting that they have a return policy allowing returns for any reason within 14-30 days. So restricting the public's access to information on prices will accomplish exactly nothing.

    3. Re:Tough for Best Buy. by Obfiscator · · Score: 1

      Sure it'll accomplish something.

      Most people don't keep looking for better prices after they've already bought something, so even with the return policy Best Buy figures they'll make money...unless you're able to compare prices before you visit the store.

      --
      "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." -Indiana Jones
  20. Re:YUO FAEL IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FIRST REPLY!

  21. YOU MADE IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  22. Best Buy =best scammer by bratgrrl · · Score: 2, Troll

    Never, in the history of the company, has Best Buy had an advertised sale item on the shelf. So it's a moot issue anyway.

    Friends don't let friends shop there, they are a terrible store.

    --

    ---

    SCO is weenies
    Gator is Spyware
    Microsoft is thugs

    1. Re:Best Buy =best scammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn straight. I can't stand that place. Their prices are like 25% higher than anything you can find online. Fuck Best Buy.

    2. Re:Best Buy =best scammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, we always have the items on sale on the shelves when the weeks starts at my store. You are probably one of the dumbasses that comes in saturday night, long after all the intelligent customers have bought us out of our stock on the item.

    3. Re:Best Buy =best scammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I stopped shopping at Circuit City... They are the masters of bait & swap.

      I've usually had better luck at Best Buy. But with this... well, I guess all my shopping will be at thinkgeek this year.

    4. Re:Best Buy =best scammer by bratgrrl · · Score: 1

      Are you claiming that you actually work for Best Buy? ROTFL! You poor fool, you have my deepest sympathies.

      --

      ---

      SCO is weenies
      Gator is Spyware
      Microsoft is thugs

    5. Re:Best Buy =best scammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never, in the history of the company, has Best Buy had an advertised sale item on the shelf. So it's a moot issue anyway.

      Friends don't let friends shop there, they are a terrible store.


      This troll was modded up as informative? Oh please. too bad i dont have my moderator points anymore.

    6. Re:Best Buy =best scammer by CrazyDuke · · Score: 1

      I've seen them have the good sales sometimes. On black friday, all the good shit is gone in the first 2 minutes, though.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
  23. Somebody had better sue back this time by Quila · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sec. 512 F of the DMCA:

    `(f) MISREPRESENTATIONS- Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section--

    `(1) that material or activity is infringing, or

    `(2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification,

    shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys' fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner's authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.

    1. Re:Somebody had better sue back this time by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Have you donated anymoney for them to fight back?

    2. Re:Somebody had better sue back this time by Quila · · Score: 1

      What money? I'd say wait for Best Buy to drop their claim like Wal-Mart did, essentially admitting they had no case about the information being copyrighted (Supreme Court precedent is clearly against them in the telephone book case), and let their lawyer go after Best Buy on a contingency fee basis.

    3. Re:Somebody had better sue back this time by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      Interesting part, but I be it will almost never be used. Or if it is successfully goes to court and wins it will because of very rare circumstances.

      How do you prove something "knowingly misrepresents" something was not infringing?

      "Your honour, I didn't know that it wasn't infringing. It sure looked like it was."

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    4. Re:Somebody had better sue back this time by Quila · · Score: 1

      Any IP lawyer should know that you can't copyright a list of facts. Making such a claim in light of such basic IP law should fall under the category of "knowingly misrepresents." Still tough to prove, but would make for great precedent.

      They could have rightfully sued under trade secrets, but the DMCA is everybody's favorite hammer these days.

  24. great by standsolid · · Score: 1

    another glorious headline for the company that pays my bills. sometimes it hurts :(

    --
    WTPOUAWYHTTOTWPA
    What's the point of using acronyms when you have to type out the whole phrase anyways?
  25. mynuts won: offensive to corepirate nazi sponsors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what else could it be?

    from a mynuts won post previously titled:

    no 'stuff that matters' answers on google?

    maybe not to corepirate nazi puppets? the rest of US however, don't give a fud about getting your 'advertising' .contracts renewed.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8& oe =UTF-8&q=world+opinion+u.s.+war&btnG=Google+Search

    lookout bullow. get ready to see the light. tell 'em robbIE? tell 'em about the monIE. you're quick to /out at almost everywon whois experiencing the results of their owned whoreabull stock markup fraud/?pr? ?firm? hypenosys FUDgePacking(tm)?

    gnu millennium spells doom for stock markup frauds, aka corepirate nazis, aka the walking dead

    that's right. J. Public et AL has yet to become involved in open/honest 'net communications/commerce in a meaningful way. that's mostly due to the MiSinformation suppLIEd buy phonIE ?pr? ?firm?/stock markup FraUD execrable, etc...

    truth is, there's no better/more affordable/effective way that we know of, for J. to reach other J.'s &/or their respective markets.

    the recipe is:

    consult with/trust in yOUR creator. vote with yOUR wallet. more breathing. seek others of non-agressive intentions/behaviours. that's the spirit.

    use key words/indexing to identify yourself/your products.

    the overbullowned greed/fear based phonIE marketeers are self eliminating by their owned greed/fear/ego based evile MiSintentions. they must deny the existence of the power that is dissolving their ability to continue their self-centered evile behaviours.

    as the lights continue to come up, you'll see what we mean. meanwhile, there are plenty of challenges, not the least of which is the planet/population rescue (from the corepirate nazi/walking dead contingent) initiative.

    EVERYTHING is going to change, despite the lameNT of the evile wons. you can bet your .asp on that. when the lights come up, there'll be no going back, & no where to hide.

    we weren't planted here to facilitate/perpetuate the excesses of a handful of Godless felons. you already know that? yOUR ONLY purpose here is to help one another. any other pretense is totally false.

    pay attention (to yOUR environment, for example). that's quite affordable, & leads to insights on preserving life as it should/could/will be again. everything's ALL about yOUR motives.

  26. Get this straight by mindstrm · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Just because you have a way to make money doesn't mean it's illegal for someone else to detract from it.

    I mean, come on, get real.

    Lots of things can hurt business.
    Your competitor selling stuff cheaper than you can hurt it.. should that be wrong too?

  27. My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Today she really freaked me out.

    She's had many visions that have come true and today she had one vision of horrifying clarity. She just called me about having seen a cataclysmic taking place next week. "Black silhuettes of mangled corpses, adults and children, flying in searing hot wind against a bleeding red sky pierced by a square tower made of four smaller towers with needles at the endpoints."

    Scary stuff. She was really shaken by it.

    1. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by quonsar · · Score: 2, Funny
      She just called me about having seen a cataclysmic taking place next week

      it's rare to see cataclysmics out and about this late in the year. usually they hibernate.

    2. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Don't marry your girlfriend, she's schizo.

    3. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You don't know her. She's sensitive to the spiritworld but that doesn't make her insane. As I said, many if not all her predictions have come true in one way or another. I for one am convinced.

      But to make you feel better, we have no intention to get married. Marriage is an institution based on the customs of ancient patriarchal societies in which wife was man's property. We have an open relationship like a relationship between two equal adults should be.

    4. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by dswensen · · Score: 1

      Oh that's just the latest NIN video, tell her to stop napping in front of the TV.

    5. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      bleeding red sky pierced by...smaller towers with needles at the endpoints

      I hope you don't mind me asking, but I hope your girlfriend is not a (recovering) junkie, by any chance? The imagery I quote above sounds a lot like thinly veiled description of shooting drugs: bleeding (veins), red sky (high) and needles...

      Apocalyptic visions typical of a psychotic mind are also present.

    6. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If you tell your spiritworld girlfriend that your penis is possessed by a demon will we suck it out?

    7. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Go ahead and mock all you want.

      Deep inside you know that you're a small, insecure person deep in denial trying to make sense of a world that's much more wonderful and complex than your materialistic mind allows you to believe.

    8. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL... i bet you've never touched drugs in your life... that would explain why you have absolutely no idea what you're babbling about..

    9. Re: My psychic girlfriend's vision by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      Your girlfriend:

      She's had many visions that have come true and today she had one vision of horrifying clarity. She just called me about having seen a cataclysmic taking place next week. "Black silhuettes of mangled corpses, adults and children, flying in searing hot wind against a bleeding red sky pierced by a square tower made of four smaller towers with needles at the endpoints."
      Normal girlfriend:
      Hon,
      I burned the gingerbread men and had to chuck them out, so that treat's off. But my new four-poster arrived today and I've already picked out the stockings I'm going to tie you out with, so you won't be complaining about any lack of treats tonight.

      p.s. - Keep your hand off the hardware this afternoon, 'cause I'll be expecting a magnificent "five poster" after dinner.
      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    10. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, it was funny as hell.

    11. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She's sensitive to the spiritworld but that doesn't make her insane.

      No, being with you has made her insane. The rest of what you say is just new-age, left-wing, feel-good babble with no meaning. You need to get your life straight before it's too late. Marriage and family is what it's all about. And you're going to miss it.

    12. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Spiritworld?

      Rawr, rawr, rawr. Neurobiology and neuropsychology would say otherwise. Stimulation of the brain through both electrical and magnetic (ie. like NMR, only focused) means has shown that artifacts such as "astral projection," spiritual sight and deity or spirtual presence (ie. Zeus is in the room with you) are easily elicited. The specific presence you feel is largely determined by what spirituality you subscribe to at the moment. Most Christian subjects felt Jesus's presence in the room.

      Are you two some of those Wijins or Wiffits or whatever you call them? Runnin' around all naked and stuff, holding ceremonies to the moon. Heh.

      If you think I'm some unejumicated Redneck, I suggest you think again. I've run around in quite a few pagan circles. Spirit world. Har. What I'm convenced of is that it's a bunch of foo. Like any spiritual beliefs, they're emotional, so I'll have absolutely no effect on yours, no matter what I say. That being the case, please continue running around skyclad with your handfastings and spirit world stuff. Your "marriage is an institution based on patriarchal blah blah" is just as much foo as spirits.

      If you have an open relationship between two equal adults, than as two equal adults you will realize that the institution of marriage has legal meanings that protect both parties, too. Marriage isn't a basket full of goodies and dogma that is handed to you, but an empty basket that both people fill with their own stuff. The idea of "Marriage is only an institution based on the customs of ancient patriarchal societies in which a wife was man's property" is only because *you* believe it to be that way. On the other hand, *my* marriage is a relationship based on equality and a sense of partnership between me and my wife. There's no ownership implied.

      Well...except when I've been a bad boy and she gets out the whips. I'll leave that subject for another area of science to explain: Psychology & Human Sexuality.

    13. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by eatdave13 · · Score: 1

      Oh, you're both insane. That might work out for you. I knew a couple like that. Their kids were insane too. Their daughter was hot, I had a thing for her all through high school until I got to know her and had to listen to 4000 stories about ghosts every 8 seconds. I would have fucked her right up until she slept with a heroin addict that used her wierd ass mind to convince her they were meant for each other or something. Meaningless sex with a psycho is one thing, but risking AIDS is stupid.

      That taught me an important lesson though. I used to sleep with any box I could get into. Luckily, this was when I was in high school and most girls hadn't had the chance to catch diseases yet. Now I'm much more careful, and make sure to get to know her first. Any stories about wiccans, ghosts, psychic powers, alien abductions, and I'm out like a fat kid in dodgeball. I end up getting laid a lot less, but hey, it's better than herpes.

      If you two do decide to have children, and I would recommend against it, I don't think you're in any psychological shape to raise a child properly, make sure to teach your children that if they tell people about their nutty beliefs that others will take advantage of it. That way, maybe your hot daughter won't fuck a heroin addict and my son can fuck her instead.

      --
      "Verbing weirds language." -- Calvin
    14. Re: My psychic girlfriend's vision by eatdave13 · · Score: 1

      +4 Reality Check

      --
      "Verbing weirds language." -- Calvin
    15. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe *that's* why I didn't get any nookie while in highschool - I always wore my "Got DeCSS?" T-shirt.

    16. Re: My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Normal Girlfriends = Best. Girlfriend. Evar.

      Especially your take. I hope you have one of them.

    17. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Surt · · Score: 1

      The whole problem with the nmr/mri causes hallucinations theory is that the scientists didn't understand that those machines attract ghosts with their powerful magnetic fields.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    18. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by JimFromJersey · · Score: 1

      can she get me the lottery numbers?

      --
      between the greater and lesser infinities sleep the dreams undreamt
    19. Re:My psychic girlfriend's vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      U, sir, R teh funyy.

      Thanks for playing. For you, we have this wonderful parting gift!! Frank, tell him what he's won!

      "Well, Tom, he's won the Creationist home game! Be prepared for some zany, wild stuff! Also, we've included a gift certificate for a site-license for any one of the Plug'n'Pray series! Yes, with the site license, you can be sure to install, er instill your beliefs into your children without any worry of how many little punks, er pumpkins you're going to have!

      Give him a hand!

  28. Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2
    Long live Consumeras!

    I won't be buying anything that day. Why go to the store at all? It will be crowded, people will push and shove to get their hands on the lastest, bestest, cheapest item, forgetting *why* they're there in the first place.

    This 'holiday' has gotten so far away from the original meaning that it shouldn't be called 'Christmas' anymore.

    Society, marketing and more marketing shames everyone to buy, buy, buy. Makes me ill to see 'Christmas' decor up *the day after Halloween*.

    Spend time with your family and friends. Let them know you love them. Give them a gift, even. Just don't get sucked into the 'holiday spirit' of finding the best deal on Takgagamoochi cards or whatever.

    Your time is the best gift. Or old Playboy mags.

    1. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by memechaser · · Score: 1

      For Christmas you give old playboy mags to family and friends? blech!

    2. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by Ummagumma · · Score: 1

      blech?

      He said old, not used. :-D

      --
      "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson
    3. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by Pepebuho · · Score: 1

      You should read Skipping Christmas

    4. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by ainsoph · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Remember, the day after Thanksgiving is also the Buy Nothing Day. A day to be celebrated.

      http://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/bnd/tour/1.ht ml

      http://www.ddh.nl/nwd/english.htm

      http://www.buynothingday.co.uk/

      Join in, spread the word. Buy nothing.

    5. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      Your town waited until *after* Halloween?

      I saw Christmas decorations up a few weeks *prior* to Halloween.

      (sigh) I remember when the earliest that you'd see Christmas decorations was the day after Thanksgiving, when all of the shops would spruce up overnight for Black Friday.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    6. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by Sabalon · · Score: 1

      I love Christmas.

      I just hate what it has become. It used to be a special time of the year. Everyone was nice.

      Now it starts before Halloween, EVERYTHING has a "christmas" special (tv programs have their special episodes, cheezy artists have some half-assed christmas episode, special holiday releases of candy, cereal, etc...)

      And like you said...everyone with their "ME FIRST" attitude.

      All I want is my sisters to make it home and for it to snow (though this year, I'll settle for temps below 60)

    7. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      I won't be buying anything that day. Why go to the store at all? It will be crowded, people will push and shove to get their hands on the lastest, bestest, cheapest item, forgetting *why* they're there in the first place.

      I won't be buying anything that day either, because I'll be picking up FFX-2 this Wednesday and plan to lock myself in my house for a good two weeks afterward. :)

      Seriously, I agree with this sentiment. I don't like dealing with huge crowds - I still do my Yule shopping, but I tend to do it on a weekday in mid-December. That way, most of the "crowd" is still at work or at home or otherwise not in my way; and I still have time to ship presents halfway across the country as-needed.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    8. Re:Christmas is Dead - OT rant by teamhasnoi by ddimas · · Score: 1
      Why don't you celebrate Christmas the way the first Christians did. They prepared for the Christmas feast by holding the Winter Lent, that's right folks, forty days, no meat, prayer and fasting, just like Easter. Then on Christmas Day they went to Church, had Communion, and then went to the feast, which lasted twelve days (Remember that old song the Twelve Days of Christmas?) until Epiphany on January 6th. During the Twelve Days of Christmas small gifts were exchanged to honor Christ and the gifts of the Magi at His birth. Nothing expensive, just to show you cared.


      The "holiday spirit" seems to be an evil spirit that wants to cause financial ruin and detracts from the charachter of the day.


      For those of us who live in the US, since Thanksgiving is a great national holiday, start fasting the Monday after Thanksgiving (gives everyone a chance to use up the leftovers).


      Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!


      Even the ones who will flame me for this post.

  29. Good for consumers, not for stores by ajensen · · Score: 1
    It seems that this could be very good for consumers but not so good for businesses. If the pricing information is available to the public, then this destroys some of the potential strategies for the companies -- as discussed in several posts before mine. But with the prices available, the companies could easily try to "one up" (or one down, since it's pricing) each other in an effort to bring in more customers.

    It's usually beneficial to the consumer when this sort of competition is started. A prime example where I live is Meijer vs. Wal-mart. When Meijer arrived, the price war that followed was a great one for us consumers. I imagine that a similar thing might happen in this case.

    --a

    1. Re:Good for consumers, not for stores by RenaissanceGeek · · Score: 1

      We used to have three grocery stores in my town: one newer/larger, one older/smaller, and one in the mall.
      They got into a price war.
      We now only have two grocery stores: and one of them was built after the smaller/older store went out of business.
      The benefits of price wars are temporary.

      --
      What is the difference between a small revolutionary change and a large evolutionary change?
  30. You mean fighting our culture, right? by fredmosby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    America has been based on consumerism for the last 50 years. Doesn't that make it part of American culture?

    1. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by TWX · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "America has been based on consumerism for the last 50 years. Doesn't that make it part of American culture?"

      No wonder many people hold American culture in lower esteem than that of a petri dish...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by adamfranco · · Score: 3, Interesting

      America has been based on consumerism for the last 50 years. Doesn't that make it part of American culture?

      Yes, it does. It is sad that our [American] culture is defined by consumerism as opposed to food, literature, art, music, fairy tales, and social events.

      When someone says "American Culture", what is the first thing that pops into your head? I think Coke, or something along those lines. Say "Russian Culture" and I think ballet, itsy-bitsy figure skaters, and vodka. "Italian?" Pasta mama mia! And opera. Ferrari is there, but somewhere down the list.

      Granted, cultural history here starts about 300 years ago, versus 2,000-4,000 years in much of the rest of the world. I'm not including Native Americans because we, for all intents and purposes, exterminated them. Lack of an ancient heritage doesn't have to mean that all we think about is obtaining "stuff". We can do better than this.

      On that "black friday" day, buy nothing. In fact, buy nothing (or little) whenever you can. Instead of working extra hours for money to buy christmas presents, take that time and spend it with your kids/family. Heck, make them something with your hands. They'll remember it for a heck of a lot longer than an expensive piece of anything from a store.

      </rant>

      --
      "When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind." -- Bill Moyers
    3. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Maserati · · Score: 1

      Cultural history starts 300 years ago ? I must have imagined being assigned several plays by Sophocles in high school English, or architectural disucssions covering the classical influence on most of our public buildings. Or the whole Shakespeare thing...

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    4. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Russian Culture: Vodka, Mailorder Brides, Matrioshka Dolls on EBay
      Italian: Kraft Italian Dressing, HBO's Sopranos, Italian Marble, Cadillac

      Great stuff! :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    5. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Rudolf · · Score: 1

      I don't think Shakespere was American.

    6. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't you get the memo?

    7. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make them something with your hands? That sounds worse than getting socks as a christmas present. What are you going to do, knit your kids some mittens? If I was a kid that got such a crappy present I would be exremely pissed. Stick with XBox and PS2 games unless you want your kids to hate you. ktnxbye

    8. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You act like consumerism is a bad thing. Consumerism is what drives economies. A steady increase in consumer spending almost inevitably leads to a boom period for the economy. When people stop consuming at a high rate, the economy heads down. It's also really, really stupid to have "buy nothing day" on the biggest shopping day of the year. The amount of money flying around on the day after Thanksgiving are so high that companies are not going to notice if a few broke hippies don't shop that day. If you want anyone to notice your stand against The Man, you should do it on a slow shopping day when more people might be willing to comply with you.

      Also, the cool thing about America is that there is no single culture. There are urban cultures, rural cultures, religious cultures, and so on. Each one draws from a different set of influences. America has no defining culture because our population is so diverse. Each culture has its own different food, literature, art, music, etc. Mexican-American culture is significantly different from Mexican culture.

      You also seem to be mixing up the iconography of a culture with the true values of a culture. I think most Italians would probably be offended if all you could think about Italy was pasta. All the Coke analogy proves is that Coke has been successful at selling their image. Everyone knows Coke is from America, whether it's an important part of our culture or not, so you just kind of make the relation.

    9. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by ShinmaWa · · Score: 1

      Ryan --

      I think you hit the nail on the head. Just wish I had points to mod you up.

      --
      The /. Effect: Thousands of users simultaneously accessing a site to not read its content.
    10. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by 198348726583297634 · · Score: 1
      that's funny..when I hear 'american culture,' I think of Aaron Copland's "Hoedown" or charles wysocki or walt whitman or any number of great american cultural producers.

    11. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what makes us wealthy is the consumer culture so go ahead you capatilistic luddite and don't buy anything, in fact become a hermit.. sure we're using up all our natural resources and one day will have to mine the trash dumps and the oceans... (which we do now incidentally)... we are on a path to certain destruction, you have no chance to survive, make your time!

    12. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the cool thing about America is that there is no single culture.

      America has no defining culture

      It does not necessarily follow there is no culture. The word "defining," while a nice attempt at qualifying the statement, doesn't help.

      The failure of the educational system is complete when the citizenry begins to believe there is no culture.

    13. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by canadian_right · · Score: 1

      Consumerism is a bit out of hand in my opinion. Too many people covet "stuff" that they don't realy need. Only a hundred years a go people were saying that everyone had to be farmers to keep the economy going. Now we have to be good little consumers? Personally I value free time over the money I earn from working. I need money, and I work enough to may the rent and buy luxuries, but I have never owned a new car, a designer anything, the latest video card, the latest game console, disposable mop, or any of a hundred different unnecessary "consumer items". Easy credit and "right now, me, me, me" culture leads many people into thinking if they just have that one more "thing" then they will be happy. In general it doesn't make them happy (but it sure makes the credit card companies happy).

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    14. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by canadian_right · · Score: 1

      A Klingon wrote Shakespear's play. Shakespear stole them using a primitive donkey powered time machine. This almost led to a diplimatic incident aboard Kirks ship. (ST VI)

      --
      Anarchists never rule
    15. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what makes us wealthy is the consumer culture so go ahead you capatilistic luddite and don't buy anything

      Actually, its the capitalistic ones who ARE buying. You need to check you derogitory terms, perhaps you mean something among the following:
      Red Commie,
      Socialist Pig,
      Smelly Hermit.

      In the future, please use the apropriate terms when attempting to slander. :-)

    16. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russian Culture: Vodka, Mailorder Brides, Matrioshka Dolls on EBay
      Italian: Kraft Italian Dressing, HBO's Sopranos, Italian Marble, Cadillac


      Vodka - Russian
      Mailorder Brides - Russian
      Matrioshka Dolls on EBay - Russian/American
      Kraft Italian Dressing - American
      HBO's Sopranos - American (even set here)
      Italian Marble - Italian
      Cadillac - American

      Well, your batting at about .500 so I'd recommend a refresher course in American companies: EBay, Kraft, HBO, GM.

      By the way, why did list Cadillac under Italian culture? Its named after a lake/town/indian like-named combo in north, central Michigan. Not much in the way of italian influence.

    17. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      No, it's extremely SMART to have a buy nothing day on the biggest shopping day of the year - not because of any principle in particular, but because shopping on the day after Thanksgiving is fscking awful - parking lots all full, traffic jams, malls full of screaming children and angry parents, massive checkout lines. It is NOT a pleasant experience.

      I try and do all my shopping at off-peak times so I can get somewhere to park and get in and out of a shop as quickly as possible: mainly because I detest shopping.

    18. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by shostiru · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Actually, I think staying home on the biggest shopping day of the year sounds like a brilliant idea, I'd rather shop when there are fewer people around.

      Obviously, consumerism drives the US economy, I don't think many would dispute that. Suggesting that people buy less stuff they don't need is about opting out of that and (if enough people do so) changing the economy itself. And if our current economy is so fragile that it will fall apart if people stop buying crap they don't need, maybe a transition to something more resilient would be a good idea.

      Keep in mind that even if the idea does catch on beyond "a few broke hippies" (incorrect and insulting, and I'd point out that a lot of mainstream cultural elements started out with a few dedicated weirdos), it won't happen overnight. There will be plenty of time for people to leave their jobs at the trinket factory and find something else. Last time I checked, the world didn't go to hell in a wheelbarrow when the horse-drawn carriage market evaporated either. I have faith that a suitably unfettered market will adapt to changes in consumer behaviour.

      The choice between working twenty extra hours per week at a job I dislike so I can buy stuff I don't need, versus running my own business, spending that extra time with family and friends, and actually *saving* money for the future, isn't exactly difficult for me. Your mileage may vary. If you don't agree, it's a free country and you can vote with your wallet (as long as you don't buy any universal garage door openers).

      No major disagreement re iconography and values, although I happen to think that consumerism dominates both in the US.

    19. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by ojQj · · Score: 4, Interesting
      As an American living in Germany, I'm sick of seeing American culture belittled based on false premises. You at least don't try "Americans have no culture", but your statement is still blatantly false that our cultural history is only 300 years old.

      Our history on this continent is only 300 years or so old. But our culture, just like that of the Europeans is thousands of years old. Just because our ancestors moved to a new continent doesn't mean they gave their culture up. We got our culture from our ancestors; the Europeans got their culture from their ancestors. We've changed that culture since then, the Europeans have changed that culture since then. Why should the Europeans somehow have more of a right to that culture just because they live on the same continent that our shared ancestors lived on?

      Legitimate criticism (like criticisms of American consumerism) are justified as long as clear arguments are presented to show that those are indeed features of American culture and that they are indeed harmful. The yogurt joke* is just bigotry in one of its variety of forms.

      Oh and by the way: my father spent 2 years with the Navajos and I have Cherokee indian ancestry. Native American culture has had a direct effect on the way I view the world. Stating that Native American culture has no effect on our culture today is just as inaccurate as stating that European culture isn't a part of our cultural heritage. Just as one example: did you know that the turkey, the potato, tobacco, the tomato, the pumpkin, the cranberry, corn, kidney beans, bell peppers, pecans, squash, and many other crops are American? Many dishes which are made from these foods still cannot be found in Germany today (cornbread, pumpkin pie, candy corn, sweet potato casserole, cranberry relish, pecan anything, etc.)

      *(what's the difference between a cup of yoghurt and America? -- yoghurt will eventually develop a culture)

      (end rant -- sorry. As you can imagine its an issue of some sensitivity for me.)

    20. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Just curious... what if you can do all that without using credit?

      I agree with you to an extent... and I'm the same way (although I have purchased a new car, but only with the philosophy that it should last at least ten years). I am about to buy a PlayStation 2. All those Christmas presents I'm buying for the kids, the wife, and other relatives - cash only.

      There's nothing wrong with "consumerism", the problem is when people go into debt to buy what they can't afford. I HAVE been there. Never again.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    21. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Most people have too short a memory.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    22. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      I guess it's all in the expectations. My wife and I have fun with day-after-Thanksgiving shopping. We go out for an early breakfast, and try to get 3 or 4 specific items we're looking for. If you're lucky, and are interested in the main items that are getting discounted, you can score some major deals. But the key is to enjoy the throng and make it a challenge, not a nuisance.

      Of course after that weekend, I usually do my shopping during my lunch hour - the "low tide" makes it easy to get in and out...

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    23. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by love2hateMS · · Score: 1

      Goodness.. do you really hate your country that much?

      What is America's culture? America is UNIQUE in the world in that it is very difficult to reduce our culture to a simple concept. We are a hodge-podge of cultures from all over the world. You can hardly compare the culture of rural Kentucky to that of Brooklyn. California is an entirely separate country it is so different than the rest of the U.S. Right here in my home city there are entire neighborhoods that speak only one language, and it is not English. What culture are they exactly? That is the defining characteristic of "American culture"-- we have everything!

      Our culture did not start 300 years ago, it started thousands of years ago, because everyone here came from "somewhere else." Do you think they just forgot where they came from?

      Nice of you to gratuitously drop that "exterminating native Americans" line-- you must REALLY hate your country. Do you also claim that ALL modern Germans are responsible for the extermination of the Jews in WWII? If you hate the U.S. so much try living somewhere else with 70% taxes, crappy health-care, inaccessible higher education-- try Norway. Their court just ruled that the government needs to purchase a car for a short man because he is embarassed to ride the bus because he is only 4'2" tall. (I'm not making that up).

      Ugh.

    24. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by rhombic · · Score: 1
      When someone says "American Culture", what is the first thing that pops into your head? I think Coke, or something along those lines.

      Obviously you live in LA...

      --
      --
      1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
    25. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by npsimons · · Score: 1
      You act like consumerism is a bad thing.


      It is. I mean, how can it possibly be good for people to buy things they don't need? Other than for the people they are buying from, of course.


      Consumerism may look appealing (especially to all those so-called "capitalists"), but it is an unsustainable model for an economy. It eats it's young, the poor and the ignorant. I mean, if everyone is spending their money on buying things, where is the money to invest in companies going to come from? What are these people going to do when it comes time for them to retire or pay their bills? What if they can't work anymore and have no savings because they've been patriotically consuming all they can?


      In this day and age, most people tend to live beyond their means, which is a dangerous game. Have you ever heard of credit card roulette? It's like Russian roulette, only instead of guns and bullets, you use credit cards and money, and having an empty chamber means you lose.

    26. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Scroatzilla · · Score: 1
      food, literature, art, music, fairy tales, and social events

      Man, you must be living in a cave.

      food: McDonald's

      art: McDonald's hamburger wrapper

      music: McDonald's iTunes MP3 giveaway

      fairy tales: McDonald's stories about Mayor McCheese, the Hamburglar, fry guys, that early bird thing...

      social events: McDonald's birthday parties.

    27. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Slime-dogg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's true. All nations still dwell within the U.S., even if they are not still within their sovreign states. The American Culture is much more than a propensity to eat sweet and fatty things, and to buy the biggest thing with the most pizzaz. The culture of the U.S. is a conglomeration of family values, community support, acceptance of differences, in addition to the food, all blended together with a "don't tread on me" attitude.

      This became most apparent after 9/11, where each U.S. citizen felt that much closer to their fellow citizen. I'm sure the Red Cross hadn't seen so much blood donated as in those following weeks, nor has New York been offered so much voluntary assistance. The Stars and Stripes became an emblem that shone on automobiles, and though the flag was treated without respect in these instances, the motivation, attitude, and intentions were sincere and honorable.

      The culture gets buried beneath things that are clearly against it's members, those things being the superior attitudes of super-commerce, the inherant human want for everything, and the supreme availability of everything to those humans. No culture goes without these problems, though. The U.S. has enemies within that treat the people like cattle being steered towards the butcher. These enemies have arisen from within the culture, but they are not of the culture itself.

      The culture of the U.S. is quite possibly the most flexible one, which is why such things can occur. Coca-Cola is not an emblem of the U.S. culture, rather it is a battle-flag of it's children. The culture supports the U.S., it thrives within each of its citizens without them knowing about it.

      The culture of the U.S. is not shallow, like many think it is. The culture is possibly more complex than any other on this Earth, precisely because of the number of lives, races, and creeds that went into building it. It has its flaws, yet it is the object of jealousy the whole world over. People look at America and thing Coke, yet people also look at America and think "freedom," "spirit," "steadfastness," and "cohesion."

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
    28. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by japhmi · · Score: 1
      It's also really, really stupid to have "buy nothing day" on the biggest shopping day of the year.

      Of course, the day after Thanksgiving isn't the biggest shopping day of the year.

      Nit, meet Pick

      --
      "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
    29. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 1

      Sure. The more people buy, the better the people they're buying them from do; but also the better the company that shipped the goods, the stores that sell the goods, the advertising company that did the marketing campaign, the advertising company for the store, etc. do. These companies are staffed by blue and white collar workers, and because people buy lots of stuff, they get to keep their jobs. I'm not saying you should go out and spend beyond your limits, simply that not consuming is bad for things. Massive debt is always bad, but trying to convince people they should not perform an important role in the economy is just stupid.

    30. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have never worked retail.

    31. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by npsimons · · Score: 1
      but trying to convince people they should not perform an important role in the economy is just stupid.


      No, it's not; it's called "simple living". Besides, any "social model" (including economic models) that requires it's participants act a certain way sounds pretty broken and totalitarian to me.


      Back to the real issues: why should people buy things they neither want nor need?

    32. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Eccles · · Score: 1

      You act like consumerism is a bad thing. Consumerism is what drives economies.

      Bah. If you spent the money on charitable causes (such as medical research), you would stimulate the economy just as much, and at the end you would have more medical progress instead of broken or obsolete gadgets taking up space in your attic or basement.

      Or, if you don't spend it, and invest it, someone else may use the money to invent or improve new technologies. Are we better off because we bought bonds during WWII and the gov't developed jet engines and computers? Or would we have been better off spending on consumer goods? The tech advancement from war comes because we do the former then, not the latter.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    33. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the Coke analogy proves is that Coke has been successful at selling their image.

      selling the images has been sucessful, true.

      but isnt the product just sugar water & bubbles?

      ie: its one thing to beat your chest about 'naming', 'branding' and 'culture', but when it comes down to it, the substance is fluff!

      and how did all that american oil get under the iraqi's sand?

    34. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by craw · · Score: 1

      I have to agree with you that you must try to make things enjoyable and interesting. Enjoying the throng is the key thing as you mentioned. But how do you do this

      Holiday shopping is a great time for people watching. I really like watching parents with children. When stuck in a long check out lin take the time to observe your surroundings. Talk to someone in line!

      We have become cynical and jadded in our older age. To really "enjoy" shopping during this time one must watch the kids and try to remember when you once enjoyed this experience.

    35. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Channard · · Score: 1
      but isnt the product just sugar water & bubbles?

      Hell, no! You forgot the hugely innovative twist of lemon that, according to one person, makes drinking Coke lemon 'like drinking ordinary coke through a j-cloth'

    36. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Nice of you to gratuitously drop that
      > "exterminating native Americans" line-- you must
      > REALLY hate your country. Do you also claim that
      > ALL modern Germans are responsible for the
      > extermination of the Jews in WWII?

      Having a German girlfriend, and being a non german myself, I can say that that is what happens with most people still, yes, moreso, people look odd at me at times due to being involved with someone from Germany.

      Is that the mistake of those people? yeah. Just realize that it is not something that is used uniquely against the USA, it is something typically human to do. Don't like it? start makign sure you dont get involved in nasty stuff, and when you do, make absolutely sure you deal properly (and ignoring it is not proper dealing)

      > If you hate the U.S. so much try living
      > somewhere else with 70% taxes, crappy
      > health-care, inaccessible higher education--

      First of all, you 'americans' simply cannot deal with critisism. Being critical about somethign does NOT, I repeat NOT mean hating it, or even being opposed to it.

      Critisism and seeing the mistake one makes is the first step towards improvement, next time you are faced with critisism, read it like that and do something with it.

      Last time I checked, healthcare in much of Europe is of similar quality to that in the USA, but is available to everyone, regardless of income. Last time I checked in the USA, there was some 10%+ of the population not able to afford health insurance or decent healthcare. What was your point again?

      > try Norway. Their court just ruled that the
      > government needs to purchase a car for a short
      > man because he is embarassed to ride the bus
      > because he is only 4'2" tall. (I'm not making
      > that up).

      Yes, this is why you pay a lot of tax there, the government also has to provide a lot for that.
      You get what you pay for, and if you like paying less and getting less, or paying more and getting more is not a matter of good/bad but of what you prefer. Sorry, but so far you completely fail to make any point whatsoever.

      Now, lets look at a few details..

      The USA is based on the ideas of freedom from tirany, responsibility of the individual, justice regardless of class/position and many such things (go read the constitution and the many documented letter exchanges between the foundign fathers)

      That country now imprisons people without any proper handling or access to the legal system. This is justice with disregard for class or position or such? (and dont coem with the bullshit that those peopel are not american citizens, the constitution and bill of rights are definitely not limiting themselves to american citizens, bvut rather to ALL peopel the system gets to deal with)

      Freedomn from tyrany? come back when the USA stops forcing its laws onto other countries.

      Let me put it simple, I do not hate the USA, but I do hate the people there who cite all the American values, and act completely opposite to them, and sadly enough, the US government and its majority support are clearly among those.

      Now, go get your facts straight and go learn to deal with critisism.. oh, and take off your nationalist 'we rule and we have no mistakes, we are PERFECT' attitude.

    37. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      What a load of 'American Dream' crap...

    38. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Wouter+Van+Hemel · · Score: 1

      Hahaha... nope. Freedom? Cohesion? Not anywhere near my mind. American culture (and Western culture in general) is diverting to something many despise as much as your 'cattle towards the butcher' countries. Once great, but now going over the top. Pop and extreme capitalism breads emptiness, lack of inquiry, apathy. We are creating a nation of apathic followers. What we see after 9/11, is nothing but a temporary mask, a meaning for people's otherwise meaningless lives. It's cattle for the big machine of economy. It's cattle for every shady government, nationalist fuck or religious leader. It's freedom for the one with most money; living in a strongly capitalistic society, justice is always on the side of the one who can afford the money or time to litigate. In fact, there isn't a nation in this world so strongly based on blind faith (be it religion, nationalistic superiority, extreme capitalism, etc) as the US. It's scary.

      Expressions such as 'superior attitudes of super-commerce', aka G.R.E.E.D., show where the problem arises: you seem to think that America is benevolent because it doesn't "attack" other countries (well, that's already been proven wrong, but let's not divert). America doesn't need to attack other countries, because it's the most powerful nation, both in terms of military, and economical. Waging war would not be wise for many reasons, mostly because it already has the power. America uses economy pretty much like strong armies were used in the past centuries: the weapons changed, but don't give me any of the pseudo-humanistic crap that this is now a time of peace in the world now America's on top. We're not killing them, We're starving and polluting them to death. Wow, big humanistic progress...

      People are people, it's just the way their primary feelings are expressed that's different.

      Trust me, your culture ain't more complex than any other. Everybody for his own good; shallow, hedonistic delight. In fact, it surprises me you even have to mention that people bothered to give blood in an emergency. That is pretty common in ANY part of the world. Without nationalist shows, that is. Frankly, I find the lack of inquisitive thought in your post rather scary and even a bit disgusting. Coca-cola (and big, monopolistic businesses in general) the battle flag of America's children? I hope you have some better morals hidden away somewhere than shown in your "profit" mantra.

      Where American and Western core concepts of extreme capitalism are headed, there is no place for "family values, community support, acceptance of differences", only hail the holy buck and naive, populistic masses.

    39. Re:You mean fighting our culture, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You act like consumerism is a bad thing. Consumerism is what drives economies. A steady increase in consumer spending almost inevitably leads to a boom period for the economy.

      Consumerism is a bad thing. It's the reason while Americans are on average twice richer today as 20 years ago, on average they are about equally happy. Because instead of taking more good time with friends and family by working less, the extra money is spent on superflous goods, requiring working as much.

  31. The right to profit by Aceticon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Much of a store's profits are made on strategy. When this kind of data is released, it cuts into the ability of a business to price things appropriately to the demand.

    I'm not saying the DMCA oughta cover this, but this is definitely something that can hurt business.


    There is no such thing as a right to profit.

    Businesses will try to get as much money as they can from their customers, while customers will try to get what they need/want for the cheapest price.

    Using the DMCA to deny a customer's right to find a beter bargain is just another sympthom of how much the system is skewed in favor of business.

    1. Re:The right to profit by Champaign · · Score: 1
      There is no such thing as a customer's right to find a better bargain.

      If there was, couldn't we just find the best price then keep invoking this "right" to get better and better prices?

    2. Re:The right to profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually yes we can and do keep invoking that right to get better and better prices, until we reach a price point noone will sell at. Customers do have a right to choose what to buy, if you want to force people to buy your goods against their will I suggest you move to a country that doesn't have antitrust laws.

    3. Re:The right to profit by bnenning · · Score: 1
      There is no such thing as a customer's right to find a better bargain.


      Er, what? A customer absolutely has the right to compare products from different sellers and buy from who he believes provides the best deal. How could it be otherwise?

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    4. Re:The right to profit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say they don't have a right to find a better bargain, but they certainly have the right to look for one.

  32. Maybe for small stores, but not for Best Buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big stores often try and undercut the smaller stores by reducing prices on some items to the point where money is lost for the sole purpose of forcing smaller stores to close their doors. Eventually this leads to a monopoly. I would argue that even if you have two large corporations that share an industry it is still a monopoly.

    Price strategies for small stores where there are 100's of competitors should be protected. They all have different things on sale at different times. But when there are only two or three chains, then there is no reason to protect this information, and a good reason to release it. By releasing this pricing information you give the small mom and pop stores a heads up. If best buy is going to blow out VCR's at a loss of 10 dollars a VCR, it might not be a good year for Dad's Electronics to stock up on VCR's.

  33. best buy black friday items by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maxtor 120GB 7200RPM Internal HD w/8MB Buffer - $50 A/R
    SanDisk 256MB CF Card - $40 A/R
    SanDisk 256MB SD Card - $50 A/R
    DVD XCopy: Gold - $20 A/R
    Norton SystemWorks/AntiSpam/Firewall 3-in-1 package - $0 A/R
    Lite-On 4x Multi-Format DVD Burner - $80 A/R
    Samsung 17" LCD Monitor - $280 A/R
    ATI Radeon 9600 128MB - $70 A/R
    Sony P-10 5MP Digital Camera w/free 64MB MS - $400 A/R
    Canon Powershot A70 3.2MP w/free 64MB CF - $300 A/R

    1. Re:best buy black friday items by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, does one have to suffer by traveling to the brick & mortar store to take advantage of these deals or can someone do it online via bestbuy.com?

    2. Re:best buy black friday items by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SKUS! need SKUS to make sure we buy ahead of time the right product!

  34. No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just one in particular :)

    Companies making small computing devices like routers and PDA's seem to like Linux quite a bit.

  35. Your grades are already safe by David+Eppstein · · Score: 2, Informative

    At the Univ. of California, at least, we are not allowed to release student information such as grades to anyone, including parents, without the student's permission. See e.g. Section IV(B) of http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/policies/bfb/rmp11.ht ml.

    1. Re:Your grades are already safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Please! Don't cloud the issue with facts!

      Thank you.

  36. Save money by skipping sales? by magnum3065 · · Score: 1

    Where's the logic in this? Sure there are people who go and buy a bunch of stuff just because it's cheap, which is equally as dumb. However if there are products that you'll probably buy anyways that happen to be on sale, you're only hurting yourself. I'm always amazed by the people who try to be "non-conformist" but end up supporting the system they're trying to fight against.

    1. Re:Save money by skipping sales? by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      My conversation with the anti-everything group at my old highschool on the subject:
      "So even if there is something you need, you'll buy it some other time"
      "Yeah, we all have to make sacrifices to bring down consumerism"
      "So you will do that by waiting until it is no longer on sale, thus giving 'The Man', as it were, a higher profit margain"
      "I don't follow you..."
      "Say you need more toothpaste and toilet paper and some new jeans and so on. You COULD get all that for $50 or whatever...but you won't. You'll buy them for $60 when they arn't on sale. You just screwed Wal-Mart out of negative $10."
      "You obviously don't get it"

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    2. Re:Save money by skipping sales? by canadian_right · · Score: 1
      I can't abide the crowds and long line ups on these "big sale" days. I value my time at $50/hour, so if it takes an extra 15 minutes to pay for it I have to save at least $12.50.

      I find I can find good sale proces on less crowded days if I am patient. The cost of almost any consumer electronics drops every year. Just wait a year and it'll be cheaper.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
  37. Anyone have a link by fo0 · · Score: 1

    Anyone have a link to the actual scan? There must have been some good stuff on there!

  38. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

    The rest of us work for those businesses. Who else would we work for?

    Maybe ourselves? If all the corporate owned chains in the country went out of business and were replaced by mom-and-pop stores, you wouldn't see any tears from my eyes.

  39. MAYBE this DMCA thing was a bad idea... by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Okay let's assume for a moment that these (let's call them) "lawyers" are professionals of the legal profession. This assumption would lead one to understand that these "lawyers" are reasonably intelligent, educated and keep current with the practice and application of law.

    Given that there has been prior failure of the exact same application of the law we fondly refer to as the "DMCA" and assuming they are aware of this, then it is clear that these "lawyers" are not interested in using the "DMCA" as it was intended and are instead using it as a refridgerator. (As a means to apply a "chilling effect" to anything that might seem like competition or might otherwise endanger their profitability.)

    I know I am really out on a limb here suggesting that these "lawyers" would even dream of using law for purposes it was never intended. But I'm just presenting a possible explanation for their behavior without suggesting they are morons.

    1. Re:MAYBE this DMCA thing was a bad idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before you blame the lawyers, remember that they don't just do that stuff on their own. They get hired to do it.

      Best Buy may actually have legal agreements with the manufacturers of the items that they carry not to disclose priceing information until a certain date. Manufacturers also want to maximize their profits.

    2. Re:MAYBE this DMCA thing was a bad idea... by erroneus · · Score: 1

      That does not justify using inappropriate means to fight back. Their breech of agreement simply means they failed to protect their secret well enough. They should be plugging the leak, not attempting to scoop it from the ocean.

    3. Re:MAYBE this DMCA thing was a bad idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what - if you do unethical or immoral things, it doesn't matter whether you were hired or not - you're unethical/immoral! Hitler's generals are better than you - at least they were forced, not merely hired.

    4. Re:MAYBE this DMCA thing was a bad idea... by canadian_right · · Score: 1

      As much as I enjoy bashing lawyers I must defend them here. A lawyers job is to do their best for their clients. The DMCA is the law. You should be mad at the politicians who passed this horrible law that can be so easily abused.

      --
      Anarchists never rule
  40. Not Good Enough by CarlDenny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hopefully FatWallet will stand up for themselves again, and Best Buy will be laughed out of court.

    No, no, NO.

    If Best Buy gets laughed out of court in the middle of December, they've already won. Fat Wallet took down their ads, had to hire a lawyer, free speech was stifled.

    I am sad to see that FatWallet blinked this time, after staring down Walmart and getting them to back down. The argument that facts cannot be copyrighted seems solid, and the DMCA shouldn't change that (except for removign due proes, of course.) We need this case to go to court, and the countersuit to be pursued even after Best Buy drops it two weks after the fact.

    Fuckers.

    The only possible good outcome here is if Fat Wallet stood up, kept up the ads, and countersued.

    The DMCA doesn't change whether something is copyrightable, and facts

    1. Re:Not Good Enough by ziggy_zero · · Score: 1

      But one might argue this is a good thing for those of us "in the know", as it were, and still got to/get to see the prices (there's a post here somewhere with them). Now we're the only ones who know about them and thus they'll be less of a rush on those items!

      But I agree with you, Best Buy is stupid.

      But that won't stop me from getting a 120GB hard drive for 50 bucks.

      --
      I belong to the ______ generation.
    2. Re:Not Good Enough by jjhall · · Score: 1

      If you had read the article (or forum thread rather) linked to in the story, you would have immediately seen this in big, bold, red lettering:

      At approximately 11PM CST on 11/14/03, We became aware of a D.M.C.A. notification and subpoena from what appears to be the legal firm representing Best Buy Enterprise Services, Inc. (The email appears to have been sent at 5:20PM)

      Due to the late hour and legal counsel not being immediately available, we are taking the action to remove the content we believe the notification is referring to. We ask that FatWallet members do not post further information regarding this matter or links to third party sites containing the information. Under the terms of the D.M.C.A., we will have an obligation to remove such information as we become aware of it.

      We will follow up with legal counsel and take further action as appropriate.


      What this says, is that the employee who recieved the e-mail immediately pulled the article in order to check with their attorneys. This is a simple CYOA move which is highly intelligent on their part. It says they got the notice, and immediately pulled the information in question. It says they understand the information in question may be legally questionable, and that they are waiting until their attorneys are available to review whether the claim is valid. This way if it goes to court, and it is determined they were in the wrong for displaying it, they went *above and beyond* the necessary requirements since they pulled them after normal business hours.

      What does this all mean? It means when their attorneys review it and give the employee the green light to post the information due to the happenings last year with Walley-world, they have a leg to stand on. When they go to court, if it goes that far, they can stand up and say "We immediately complied, faster than can be considered reasonable, and determined the claim is false. We then re-posted the information, and wish to counter-claim that Best Buy caused our business harm by falsely claiming we were in violation."

      As long as the judge residing on the case has his head more than a few inches from the inside of his rectum, he would award damages to FatWallet for lost business over the weekend. If I remember correctly from last year (no, I didn't re-read that article) they followed the same process. If Fat Wallet were in the wrong, they would stand to lose a lot more than the lost business if they didn't comply with the original notice.

      Give FatWallet some credit, they know what they are doing (from experience) and will come out on top in the end.

      Jeremy

    3. Re:Not Good Enough by cuban321 · · Score: 0

      It's a Maxtor hard drive. I'd rather pay twice that much for a respectable brand.

      Daniel

    4. Re:Not Good Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ah, what will stop you is the fact that they will be out of stock. Think you are playing them? Riiight.

      Even if you were, check out the tragedy of the commons here.

    5. Re:Not Good Enough by 1ucius · · Score: 1

      The main link is a bit short of details, but I'd guess that BB is only prividing 'notice of copyright infringement,' rather than alleging a violation of the DMCA itself. If true, FatWallet can provide the ISP with a counter notification under 17 USC 512(g). The DMCA will then require the ISP to replace the material within 10-14 days.

    6. Re:Not Good Enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what stops someone from buying them this week and then getting Best Buy to honor the "price matching" on your "30 day low price guarantee" 2 weeks from now...?

      Nothing.

      That, you see, is part of the "problem" and why they are playing hard ball about this.

    7. Re:Not Good Enough by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Did you read this part? "Under the terms of the D.M.C.A., we will have an obligation to remove such information as we become aware of it."

      Bull. Fucking. Shit. Under the terms of the DMCA, they are not liable for contributory infringement if they remove it. That's all the DMCA says. There's no obligation, only an opportunity for a clueless pussweed to cover up his pants-pissing by gambling (correctly, it seems) that everybody else is as uninformed as him.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    8. Re:Not Good Enough by jjhall · · Score: 1

      Yes I did read that part, and it just drives my point home. They have an obligation to remove the potentially (or accused) infringing materials in order to avoid harsh penalties if they are in the wrong.

      The same with any other law. If you have property that you are given notice is potentially stolen, you have an obligation to turn it in. If it is determined to not be stolen, then you get it back. If it is, you can in good faith defend yourself because you did turn it in at the moment you became aware of its suspicious origins. You can also just hang onto it and hope for the best because you aren't "obligated" (using your definition of the word) to turn it in, but at that point you no longer have the argument of good faith on your side.

      One of my elementary teachers years ago said "I can't make you do anything, but I can make you wish you had." That is the way the law works. Actions (or inactions) and consequences. I still stand behind FatWallet, as they did what is in their best interest, and are fighting this the correct and legal way. Not flipping the bird at the law and hoping for the best. Remember, if FatWallet goes down because they made a stupid legal action (or inaction) then everyone suffers. Not only the users of the site, but it sets a precidence for any future instances.

      Would you leave the content up if it potentially caused you to be liable for contributory infringement of thousands of dollars, or more without consulting your attorneys? I suggest you think about the answer to that question before you start calling people a "clueless pussweed [covering] up his pants-pissing." And remember, they have been here before, so calling them "uninformed" seems to be an uninformed comment in itself.

  41. WHAT???? by mark-t · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Okay, the DMCA is designed to make illegal to circumvent the copy control technology on a copyrighted work. So how, exactly, does the DMCA apply here?

    1. Re:WHAT???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because a corporation with obscene amounts of money says so. At least in the USA, it's as good as law.

    2. Re:WHAT???? by Major+Tom · · Score: 1

      If a copyright holder sends an online service provider a good-faith notification that they believe content availible on one of the OSP's pages is infringing, the DMCA requires the OSP to promptly remove the content.

      So Best Buy is claiming that their price lists are copyrighted, and the DMCA requires anyone posting those prices to take them down, should Best Buy send them a letter.

      The DMCA was designed to encourage a quick response on the part of OSPs. In reality, it chills speech by requiring OSPs to expose themselves to outrageous financial liability should they want to go to court to argue that their content is not infringing.

      --
      What's good for the syndicate is good for the country. --Milo Minderbinder
    3. Re:WHAT???? by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      It doesn't apply. The law has simply turned into a game of poker. If you have the most money you can simply raise more than anyone can afford, causing them to fold regardless of how good their hand is. It's stomach turning. A big company could decide to sue me today and it would basically ruin my entire life regardless of the merits of the case. The legal system is so broken that Big Business is judge, jury and executioner.

  42. Do you really believe this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If regulations prevented this disclosure, it would be a case of government actively restricting what citizens may know and share about the goods and services on the market, for the purpose of benefiting corporate profits.

    Yet this is precisely what you admit to.

    Do you honestly believe that this behavior, in principle, is acceptable?

    How far shall the government go in blinding consumers to benefit the corporate bottom line?

    Please let us know; I'm sure Consumer Reports would like to start making plans now if their publication will be banned for distribution in the United States next year.

    Go to hell.

  43. the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The good bargains have been taken down (maybe slashdotted?) Please them post here;)

  44. Re:SSL doesn't violate DMCA by Whammy666 · · Score: 1

    The DMCA protects encrypted content from decyphering and illegal copying. But sending plain HTML over an encrypted link is entirely different. SSL protects the pipe between the server and the client from third party interception. There is no 'cracking' involved since the client and server agree on the encryption algorithm and keys to be used before the transmission takes place.

    --
    When all else fails, run.
  45. Mod up by bogie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is so true. Best Buy is King of never having items in stock you want to buy. They are also the best at screwing people out of rebates. On two occasions even though I included the receipt, the actual UPC seal etc, they have flat out lied and said something was wrong and they couldn't issue the rebate. What am I going to do? Sue them over a $20 rebate? Bunch of mother fuckers they are. I think its bestbuysucks.com that's a great place to go to read about how shitty a company they are. So many people have been screwed by them its just not funny. Amazingly the employees feel the exact same way. If you've ever wondered why the 4 guys in blue shirts run away when ever you walk up to ask a simple questionn its because they hate their job, their manager, and especially customers. Bad Karma at that place.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    1. Re:Mod up by vegetablespork · · Score: 1
      Why not sue over $20? Sure, you'll pay a filing fee for more than that to file in Small Claims, but you'll have the satisfaction of them having to get a highly paid manager (and tie up their counsel briefing him, even those they can't send a lawyer to Small Claims). And if they blow it off, there's always the possibility of a default judgement :).

      If you don't want to go through that much trouble, at least write to the Attorney General in your state, and increment the complaint counter. Who knows--you might live in a state with a good AG's office, and Best Buy could end up spending some high-priced employee time responding. Sort of a legal DDoS against their offices.

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  46. Re:YUO FAEL IT! by bhtooefr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Actually, the first and second posts in this thread need modded down, and most of this whole thread needs to be modded offtopic, except for the discussion on how it needs to be modded...

  47. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1
    Corporate owned chains like Wal Mart are only a portion of the corporations that exist in this country.

    You may get mom and pop selling you computers, but they won't be building the circuitry.

    --
    Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
  48. What's FatWallet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reads article..

    Oh! This is great! Thanks for telling me about it BEST BUY !!

  49. More serious then you realize by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    While it was meant as a joke, and im sure few will even see it:

    This is true, in this day and age, companies rule the earth.. ( that and government )

    If you think you can avoid them totally, good luck living off your home farm, and walking everywhere.. its not practical.

    Or try avoiding paying taxes for that farm when you cant walk to work.... see how far that gets you..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:More serious then you realize by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Well, once there's a molecular manufacturing machine in every household, it will be quite easy to avoid the vast majority of old-economy corporations, because they'll cease to exist -- everyone will be able to feed and clothe themselves for "free"(*) with such a machine, and the molecular "blueprints" for any object you want will be as easily available as an mp3, except this time nobody's complaining about starving to death because you "stole" their "IP."

      (*) Free as in free solar energy, recycled molecules, and volunteer design of material items (just as with current OSS).

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    2. Re:More serious then you realize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hah I cracked up thinking about McDonalds trying to sue billions of people for making illegal copies of there burgers and frys.

    3. Re:More serious then you realize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is one supposed to be able to buy land if there isnt any trade economy anymore? Without the conversion to an intellectual property economy we will devolve back into medieval fiefdoms with fuedal lords the likes of Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, George Soros and the Bush family because they already have their wealth grandfathered in and protected by private armies.

    4. Re:More serious then you realize by disconnectedsmile · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates wealth was grandfathered in? I thought he made took a chance and decided to a open a software company, turned out his chance worked out because he provided a good product and figured out the best way to distrubute it before anyone else.

    5. Re:More serious then you realize by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Well, once there's a molecular manufacturing machine in every household, [everything will be free] (free as in ... volunteer design of material items, just as with current OSS.)

      Home audio recording equipment didn't make music free. Home video recording equipment didn't make movies free. Home computers haven't made software free. Why, then, should home manufacturing make consumer goods free?

      In all three cases I cite, there is indeed a lively "free" movement. But the old-economy corporations still exist, and more than that, they still control the sectors in which they operate; most people still buy (or pirate) CDs and DVDs, and most people still pay huge premiums for proprietary software.

      With the bitter experience of the current digital revolution behind them, the big corporations will incorporate strong DRM in molecular constructors from the beginning. Do you think you'll even be able to use "free" designs in them? Not without violating the DMCA, mate.

  50. Who? What? by Old+Wolf · · Score: 1

    So, for the rest of the world: what is FatWallet (when they aren't being DMCA slaves), and how did they know Wal-Mart's planned prices when nobody else did?

    1. Re:Who? What? by dq5+studios · · Score: 1

      FatWallet is the Wal-Mart of online coupon sites. They list every deal and coupon for all stores online and offline.

  51. Best Buy got sued for something similar by rabbit994 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Best Buy got sued a while back because a guy in the Washington D.C. Metro Area was shopping for a new laptop and went store to store with his old laptop writing down prices and features because he wanted the best value. Best Buy didn't allow this and even when so far as ripping off price tags. This guy took them to court for false advertising saying their attitude didn't reflect their name "Best Buy". Judge ruled in favor and said if Best Buy wanted to practice that type of behavior, they would have to post a sign in the front that said "We do not allow competive shopping". Needless to say, Best Buy changed a few things and I think the guy got a free laptop out of them to boot.

    1. Re:Best Buy got sued for something similar by eggoeater · · Score: 1
      ...the guy got a free laptop... to boot
      No pun intended I'm sure.
  52. Can you post those here? by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 1

    If you could post those here, it'd be really good reading. Your paraphrase was probably close, but it doesn't make sense (of course, the original emails didn't either!) :)

    1. Re:Can you post those here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm at work now. I will post them when I get home, if I remember.

  53. So... What did the posting say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those of us who missed the FatWallet posting, what did it say? Curious...

  54. Re:Google has some similar stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahahaha...as the FBI are generally considered by "people who know" to be the only major commercial producers of kiddie porn, it's very likely that they know all about those sites.

  55. Re:The violation of Rob Malda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Score:+5, Insightful.

    Excellent investigative reporting.

  56. Doesn't matter.... by borgheron · · Score: 1

    Even if Best Buy delays the prices for just a week it's done it's job. The reason the prices are kept secret is because they don't want their competitors to know.

    And they'll loose a pittance on the suit while making bank on the sale.

    GJC

    --
    Gregory Casamento
    ## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
    1. Re:Doesn't matter.... by Wesser · · Score: 1

      Ohhh, they don't want their competitors to know because they might have said items on sale for even less? So I probably shouldn't say anything about every DVD in the store being on sale for $4.99? Or maybe that 250gb 7200rpm drive's black friday price of $99? What about their one day only sale of XBox and PS2 for only $79.99? And of course, don't forget the 100 DVD-R free after MIR! Don't tell any of their competitors about those or they might have comparative sales! :)

    2. Re:Doesn't matter.... by borgheron · · Score: 1

      What you're alluding to in jest is actually the truth.

      I never said it was "right" or "fair", i just said this is their strategy and it's going to work. :)

      GJC

      --
      Gregory Casamento
      ## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
  57. Re:AOL News Info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't another child pornagraphy link.. Is there anyway to see what it is before you click on it....? Or maybe where it is really linked too...

  58. Reformat the price info, dummies by Animats · · Score: 1

    You can't copyright facts in the US. (Although see the draft intellectual property rules of the Free Trade Association of the Americas on database copyright.) So take the info from the ad, and convert it to a table of items and prices.

  59. BIG DEAL OVER NOTHING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People who buy from bix box stores are not interested in quality or even watching for sales. They shouldn't care if Fat Wallet mentions their sales.

  60. OT by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    Yes. The grandparent of your post is offtopic, whereas the parent of your post is troll or flamebait (this is why we need a disgusting mod - too much kiddie porn and goatse on /. lately).

    Would you please check the "No Karma Bonus" box when posting offtopic like this? That way the mods waste less points on you, you loose less karma, and I don't see you post nor feel the need to go read the trolls you are discussing just to figure out what's going on.
    Everybody wins.

    P.S. "Troll" Applies to the offtopic porn postings, no need for a new label. They get modded down, that's all that matters.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

    1. Re:OT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting child porn seems a lil bit beyond just trolling.... Is there any legal issue here about reporting the person's IP who posted such a link...?

    2. Re:OT by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      How exactly do you find that? An AC claimed to have obtained the IP for the site in question and sent it to the FBI, but what about IPs for the ACs posting these trolls?

  61. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

    You may get mom and pop selling you computers, but they won't be building the circuitry.

    There's no reason a cooperative can't be formed to own a chip fabrication plant. Except of course that monopoly chip manufacturers wouldn't allow it.

  62. Take Christmas Back by forii · · Score: 2, Troll

    This 'holiday' has gotten so far away from the original meaning that it shouldn't be called 'Christmas' anymore.

    No kidding! "Christmas" used to be a fun celebration of the winter solstice, something especially important for those people living in Northern Europe, where the winter nights are especially long and dark. A good reason to get together with friends and family, exchange gifts, and cheer up the season.

    And then those stupid mystical religious people had to come along and appropriate it for themselves by connecting it with the supposed birthday of their "prophet". Bleah.

    1. Re:Take Christmas Back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "And then those stupid mystical religious people had to come along and appropriate it for themselves by connecting it with the supposed birthday of their "prophet". Bleah."

      You're free to celebrate it any way you want. If someone elses religion is offensive to you, then you have problems.

      Whatever happened to religious tolerance?

    2. Re:Take Christmas Back by forii · · Score: 1

      If someone elses religion is offensive to you, then you have problems.

      I'm not offended by a particular religion. I'm offended by the concept of religion. We live in the 21st century now. We have explored other planets, we've set foot on the moon. We've discovered the presence of other planets around other stars. We have determined the secrets of life, and can now clone living organisms, and are now very close to creating life forms directly from base organic molecules.

      Isn't it about time that we stop believing in some invsible man/woman/beings in the sky who will send us to some mysterious hidden place depending on our conduct here on earth?

      Oh, and if I failed to accurately describe your particular flavor of voodoo, I apologize.

      Whatever happened to religious tolerance?

      Hey, you are free to believe in anything you want. That doesn't mean that I have to believe that you are particularly clever for doing so.

    3. Re:Take Christmas Back by Saeger · · Score: 1
      I'm offended by the concept of religion.

      Nowadays most people aren't really religious the way you think. It's just another social network to belong to with a lot of traditional momentum behind it. Joining the group is often advantageous socially, economically, and psychologically. Granted there's a few zealots, but there's a larger number who just want some "mental comfort" - not that there's anything wrong with that. (I'm agnostic myself).

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:Take Christmas Back by placeclicker · · Score: 1

      How did connecting it to Jesus make you stop getting together with friends and family?

      --

      Browse at -1, because trolls are often the most creative part of /.
    5. Re:Take Christmas Back by Leebert · · Score: 1


      I'm not offended by a particular religion. I'm offended by the concept of religion. We live in the 21st century now. We have explored other planets, we've set foot on the moon. We've discovered the presence of other planets around other stars. We have determined the secrets of life, and can now clone living organisms, and are now very close to creating life forms directly from base organic molecules.


      Could you please explain how any of this excludes the possibility of a God?

  63. Has she accepted Jesus in her heart? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Has she accepted Jesus as her personal saviour?

    If not, there can be no truth in her visions since they'll always come from the Lord of the Lies, Satan.

    I strongly urge you to ask God for help!

  64. ask slashdot: why does US have this law? by jago25_98 · · Score: 1

    why does the US have this law?

    1. Re:ask slashdot: why does US have this law? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess would be someone or some group lobbied for it to protect their copyrights, intelectual property,or whatever... So maybe it wasn't intended to be this bad, but leave it to some attorneys to muddy the water....

    2. Re:ask slashdot: why does US have this law? by eskayp · · Score: 1

      Strange bedfellows: BestBuy, DMCA, and /. The two previous posts got 'flamebait' and 'zero karma' for telling it like it is. The posts may not have been new, trendy, or clever enough for the moderator, but they pretty much reflect the facts in today's legalistic culture, sad to say. Check out Catherine Crier's book: "The Case Against Lawyers" for a topical and well researched analysis.

      --
      I didn't desert Windows; Windows deserted me: BSOD
  65. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by volkris · · Score: 1

    You can't unarguably make this statement either.

    I'd say the primary purpose of government/law is to give citizens the tools they need to protect thsemselves and their property.

  66. MOD PARENT UP! Good Question! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always use the BINDS Link Safety Checker. It basically compares the link against a database of known nasty links and tells you if its safe or not. Really cool.

  67. Direct Snail-Mail to... by acousticiris · · Score: 5, Informative

    General/Corporate Inquiries
    For general comments and questions about Best Buy Co., Inc., contact:

    Best Buy Co., Inc.
    Corporate Headquarters
    P.O. Box 9312
    Minneapolis, MN 55440-9312

    This story hasn't gotten a lot of attention outside of FatWallet's forums and Slashdot. If this activity bothers you, take a few minutes, write a letter, lick a stamp, and let them know you're paying attention. They are very unlikely to win if this goes to court, so they don't need a whole lot of motivation to stop the idiotic activity. I, for one, won't be patronizing their store again. I mean really, if you need your "retail" electronics fix, they have plenty of competitors who offer the same junk at the same high prices.
    Kick them a letter and thank them for making the choice of where to shop a little easier.

    --
    "God is dead!" - Nietzsche
    "Nietzsche is dead!" - God
  68. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by volkris · · Score: 1

    Not exactly but it is their responsibility to foster a healthy economy and promote jobs for its citizens.

    Care to prove this?

    You might as well have said that it is the responsibility of government to insure that every citizen has access to milkshakes.

  69. Re:quick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From godaddy.com: Profanity error

    It wont let me :( And im too lazy to check anywhere else.

  70. DMCA is crap, but.... by atheken · · Score: 2, Insightful

    DMCA is not the best approach for Best Buy, or anybody else, but there is a serious problem with people posting prices ahead of time...

    1) it's private information, probablyy under some kind of NDA.
    2) the "leaked" ads can cause people to go and buy the stuff ahead of time, which counters the intended effect of the ad. Furthermore, it screws customers that weren't privy to the extra info.
    3) it screws the company on the "best price" strategy, since other companies can market the same price.

    this really screws up some of the economics of "draw" products, I think ethically, people should be bound to protect it.

    1. Re:DMCA is crap, but.... by vegetablespork · · Score: 1

      With regard to the NDA, Best Buy et al have cause of action against those who violated the NDA, i.e. their employees. Once the facts are out in the wild, they're facts--if I come across Best Buy's prices legally by reading a website, I have no duty to protect them, regardless of any harm which may come to the asshats at best buy for my failure to do so.

      --

      Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

    2. Re:DMCA is crap, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only someone in their corperate structure would know the prices of things the day after Thanksgiving...we're not talking about anyone at a store you are going to we are talking about some guy in a suit making well over 50k a year. The guy/people should be fired no question about it but the problem BestBuy has with their internal security should not be an issue for anyone else to have to worry about. THEY screwed up by trusting the wrong people and instead of funding an investigation to find out the source of the leak they throwing tons of cash at their lawyers...perhaps they simply don't want to wrinkle any upper management feathers.

    3. Re:DMCA is crap, but.... by atheken · · Score: 1

      you said "asshats" hahahahaha

      - You're right, but it still seems like there's some kind of ethical dilema beyond that....

    4. Re:DMCA is crap, but.... by atheken · · Score: 1

      Best Buy is a multi-BILLION dollar company. I'm not sure they can keep every employee in line... it's like the 10,000,000 employees of McDonald's has, can they really prvent them from stealing a fry or two everyonce in awhile...

  71. Advertising by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    They produce a product which, in the end, really contributes very little to society besides, admittedly, keeping a lot of people employed.

    Well, I'd say that's a pretty big contribution. Proportional to the number of people employed, in fact.

    Not only that, but they fund artistic and socio cultural events too: Free outdoor concerts that advertise beer, TV shows brought to you thanks to the support of their advertisers (and sometimes, viewers like you), etc.

    Sure, they are often annoying, intrusive, stupid, insulting, degrading, dammaging to the social fabric and just plain wrong, but they are not an homogenous force of evil, they contribute too, sometimes.

    But anyway, my point wasn't that advertisers need to be gotten rid of - but that the Corporations have no business whatsoever trying to keep accurate and information information out of the media.

    On that we are in total agreement.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

    1. Re:Advertising by BZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Well, I'd say that's a pretty big contribution.
      > Proportional to the number of people employed,
      > in fact.

      Not necessarily. Paying people is just a way of keeping score. In the end, economic development depends on producing goods and services that consumers actually want. That is, you could "employ" everyone at digging holes and filling them in, and "pay" them, but if that results in less goods and services then the pay they get does not matter -- quality of life will suffer.

      So in fact, advertising has worth only insofar as it enables consumers to get the goods and services they want.

    2. Re:Advertising by JayBlalock · · Score: 1
      That is, you could "employ" everyone at digging holes and filling them in, and "pay" them, but if that results in less goods and services then the pay they get does not matter -- quality of life will suffer.

      The problem is, we already do that. A lot. We just call the hole diggers "middle management" and similar titles. At least a quarter of the workforce is employed at jobs that contribute nothing whatsoever to society.

      Yet if they were to go away, the entire economy would collapse due to the resulting huge unemployment. We simply don't have enough "real" jobs to employ everyone in society.

      It's a nasty problem.

      --
      Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
    3. Re:Advertising by Saeger · · Score: 1
      We simply don't have enough "real" jobs to employ everyone in society.

      True, and it's set to get a LOT worse in the coming years with offshoring and increased automation replacing most bluecollar and service level jobs. Not everyone can "simply retrain" for a "new economy" job. Eventually only a tiny minority of intelligent, highly trained people will be doing any useful work, and they'll either hoard the vastly disproportionate wealth (risking revolution), or share the fruits of automated production more fairly.

      Social Welfare doesn't have to be a dirty word.

      (btw, can you introduce me to your sister Jolene? Thanks!)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:Advertising by JayBlalock · · Score: 1
      Well, people have been predicting the collapse of the workforce for at least a century, and it hasn't happened yet. But I do agree that at some point, we're going to run out of things, even make-work, for people to do and pretend to be useful.

      The problem is that socialistic practices wreak havok with the money flow. A solution to the overall problem isn't JUST going to be moving away from Objectivist capitalism - which is making the problem worse every day - but finding some new way of handling "money" that allows for everyone to eat, but still encourages productivity and prevents rampant inflation.

      And that's where it gets nasty. We may need another Smith or Marx or Keynes to wander along to work out the solution - I don't think it's going to happen through government committees.

      --
      Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
    5. Re:Advertising by Saeger · · Score: 1
      some new way of handling "money" that allows for everyone to eat, but still encourages productivity and prevents rampant inflation.

      Replace money with "whuffie" and you have a meritocracy where your incentive to be productive is to increase your respect/reputation (which is a better measure than money) such that you can "buy" something that's actually scarce, with the tax on it depending on your continued rep.

      e.g. If you find the cure for cancer, society might deem you worthy enough to "buy" 100,000 acres of prime beachfront property, with only 0.1% rep "tax." But if you tell everyone to "Get the hell of MY lawn!" and then you discover The Ultimate Doomsday Device, your rep will plummet and your property tax rockets upward.

      Just musing; I'm no economist. :)

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    6. Re:Advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's discrimination because some people are genetically predisposed to be schmucks. I know my dad was.

      The consitution says all people are created equally and have the same opportunities.

    7. Re:Advertising by JayBlalock · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I've heard similar schemes. The problem is that for them to be workable, there has to be some sort of objective arbiter of the system to make sure it doesn't turn into a popularity contest. Otherwise, we'd be right back to where we're currently at, with Jean-Claude Van Damme getting millions of whuffies to do absolutely nothing, while sewage maintenence workers are snubbed by all of society because they smell bad and have a "dirty" job, no matter how vital their work is.

      And I can't imagine any sort of aribtration system which wouldn't be abused.

      --
      Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
    8. Re:Advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that's where it gets nasty. We may need another Smith ... to wander along to work out the solution - I don't think it's going to happen through government committees.

      Please, not another Smith... it took Neo long enough to deal with the last one!

    9. Re:Advertising by nyseal · · Score: 1

      I agree. Economics 101 teaches that a country that has no production has no wealth. Countries actually need to PRODUCE something to be viable economic contender in the world. That's exactly where the US is loosing footing. We've become so 'service' oriented (and bad service at that) that it's no wonder unemployment is up. How can you provide customer service to someone who does not work? Ultimately in the service industry you have to be able to provide support for a tangible product; and who's going to do that?

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    10. Re:Advertising by yourmom16 · · Score: 1
      Yet if they were to go away, the entire economy would collapse due to the resulting huge unemployment. We simply don't have enough "real" jobs to employ everyone in society.

      For a while, maybe a few years at the very most. However with prices down and profits up, there will be productive jobs available to them, because people now can afford a lot more, and will want to buy a lot more. It would probably be better if they were gradually gotten rid of rather than all at once.

      --
      "We have got to make Stan understand the importance of voting, because he'll definitely vote for our guy." - South Park
  72. Squelch is on high by djupedal · · Score: 5, Insightful
    'they' don't want:
    • Movie premier instant reviews
    • Book reviews/blurbs/comments
    • Black Friday pre-sale prices devulged
    • Speed trap location tip-offs
    • Arrest warrant sweeps announced
    • Car computers modified to prohibit insurance snooping
    • Stop-light camera locations mapped

    We don't want....them. Us vs. them. If 'they' trusted 'us', we might trust them. In the mean time...give 'em hell.
    1. Re:Squelch is on high by jaaron · · Score: 1

      We don't want....them. Us vs. them. If 'they' trusted 'us', we might trust them. In the mean time...give 'em hell.

      Who said 'you' get to be part of 'us', huh? And how do I know that 'you' aren't one of 'them'?

      Your conspiracy theories do nothing constructive. What moderator thought this was insightful?

      --
      Who said Freedom was Fair?
  73. Re:Google has some similar stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Here it is: Your IP address is 192.168.1.1. See how smart I am? Eat that wanker!

  74. what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    phire420 writes:
    remember about the Edit by Moderator - Contents removed - Please see first message in this thread. actually having contents removed in the box, of course these newer contents removed also contain a free contents rmoved coupon. pretty nice if you are looking to upgrade for contents removed, will BB do return/rebuy on black friday if you buy now?


    Oh! So that's what this thread is about. Seriously, I thought maybe the article was written by these fine reporters or something!
  75. FULL Black Friday List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Simpsons Season 1, The Italian Job, Anger Mangement, Chicago, 28 Days Later, Charlie's Angels 2, The Lion King SE: $11.99 each (DVD)
    Madden 2004 (PC) - $14.99
    RCA 52" Rear Projection HDTV - $1000
    Daewoo 42" Plasma TV - $2300 A/R
    Panasonic 5.1 700-Watt Home Theatre w/progressive scan DVD player (speakers are built into stands) - $500 w/$50 free gift card
    600-Watt version of above w/o speaker stands - $350 w/free $50 gift card
    Bose 3-2-1 Home Theatre System - $900
    Pinnacle Studio 8 - $0 A/R
    MS Digital Image Suite 9.0 - $20 A/R
    Canon ZR60 MiniDV Camcorder - $300 A/R
    MAG 19" LCD Monitor - $430 A/R
    SanDisk 256MB USB Memory Key - $40 A/R
    Sony Clie SJ-22 - $100 A/R
    Casio 2.3" Handheld TV - $40 A/R
    APC 350VA UPS - $5 A/R
    FujiFilm FinePix A303 3.2MP - $150
    Maxtor 120GB 7200RPM Internal HD w/8MB Buffer - $50 A/R
    SanDisk 256MB CF Card - $40 A/R
    SanDisk 256MB SD Card - $50 A/R
    DVD XCopy: Gold - $20 A/R
    Norton SystemWorks/AntiSpam/Firewall 3-in-1 package - $0 A/R
    Lite-On 4x Multi-Format DVD Burner - $80 A/R
    Samsung 17" LCD Monitor - $280 A/R
    ATI Radeon 9600 128MB - $70 A/R
    Sony P-10 5MP Digital Camera w/free 64MB MS - $400 A/R
    Canon Powershot A70 3.2MP w/free 64MB CF - $300 A/R

    1. Re:FULL Black Friday List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok... posted .... i'm feeling brave! :P

    2. Re:FULL Black Friday List by Buran · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is all "after rebate", almost (and the items that aren't are too expensive for me right now, so I'll pass.)

      Rebates are a sham. I never factor in post-rebate prices -- I once got a check back from a rebate and my bank refused it, claiming it wasn't a real check. What a joke.

      This isn't anything to write home about.

    3. Re:FULL Black Friday List by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1

      That's a SWEET list of consumer goodies and I'd jump all over it if I knew that the minute I walked in the store 90% of that stuff wasn't already sold out. I'd love a 19" LCD for $430 or a 120 gig drive for $50, DVD burner for $80, etc. I'd buy almost everything on that list, IF they had it in stock, which they won't. So why even bother going if they only have 2 120 gig hard drives at that price? Those prices never seem to apply to rainchecks.

    4. Re:FULL Black Friday List by rongage · · Score: 1

      Remember too, that rebates, in their current form, are nothing more than an INTEREST FREE LOAN from the consumer (YOU) to the manufacturer.

      --
      Ron Gage - Westland, MI
    5. Re:FULL Black Friday List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What really piss me off are rebates in the context of internet shopping, when they're basically used as a way of maintaining international pricing differences. Want to charge more for your product in Europe than the USA, because the market will bear that? Don't like those pesky Europeans buying from American internet stores that ship overseas? Simple! Charge the same both sides of the Atlantic, and offer a rebate valid only for citizens of the USA/Canada!

      Bleh. It's high time someone came up with a better idea than capitalism. Maybe a specialised form that involved me being one of the one's with capital...

    6. Re:FULL Black Friday List by toddestan · · Score: 1

      And it's all after rebates, so basically take all those prices with a grain of salt. I hate rebates.

    7. Re:FULL Black Friday List by null-sRc · · Score: 1

      According to this...

      now slashdot can be sued just like FatWallet, since it is providing the service allowing distrubution of the controversial list in question. :|

      that's what the elves like to call: unicorn justice.

      --
      -judging another only defines yourself
  76. stand their ground? by ender's_shadow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    so much for that - the editors have already pruned out dmca-able material.

  77. Forget Best Buy by RevSmiley · · Score: 0

    Besides this crapola repeat of the free speech throttling WalMart deal I don't shop anywhere they charge a restocking fee. I don't return stuff that wasnt broken when I bought it or just pure crap. Charging be a restocking fee becuse you sold me junk is bogus. Best Buy can bite me.

    --
    As you can see I don't care about my karma.
  78. Black Friday Ads! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.virus2.net
    this is not a troll. just beware of lots of java and flash.

    1. Re:Black Friday Ads! by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1
  79. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1
    I'd say the primary purpose of government/law is to give citizens the tools they need to protect thsemselves and their property.

    I think the establishment of communist and socialist governments argue against this thesis.

    --
    the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
  80. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Maybe ourselves? If all the corporate owned chains in the country went out of business and were replaced by mom-and-pop stores, you wouldn't see any tears from my eyes.

    No, because you'd have died of starvation years ago. What, you watched Fight Club and really believed that crap about clothes that last a lifetime and growing crops on highways?

  81. Unconscious imagery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sounds like you did not quite understand what I meant by the "bleeding (veins), red sky (high), needles" bit.

    Well, I'll tell you. They are associations between real-world events/objects, wishes, fears and memories, and their veiled representations in one's mind. In short, veiled imagery the unconscious mind uses to communicate disturbing/repressed thoughts to the conscious mind. They are usually experienced only in dreams, but may also emerge because of a mental illness or under the influence of drugs.

    So when you read my post so that I said "red sky equals high, you got it wrong. I do not mean that the high would produce visions of a red sky. Only that even (unconscious) craving for the high may be associated in her brain with sky and hence shown as such in the dream/vision.

  82. Re:SSL doesn't violate DMCA by lwsimon · · Score: 1

    Yeah... And do you honestly think a jury - or even a judge - will know the difference between encrypted data and unencrypted data over a secure medium? suuuuure.

    --
    Learn about Photography Basics.
  83. Because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...in the U.S., the laws are no longer created to protect the interests of the citizens. Laws are written to the specifications of large corporations and their lobbyists, and "justice" goes to the highest bidder. If you want free speech, what you say had better not offend anyone who can afford more expensive lawyers than you.

  84. Re:Slashdot people are the joke here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Can't you people just wait until Thanksgiving??"

    It helps to know before hand how much money to make available to spend while the frickin banks are still open.

    Not everyone has $5000 laying under the seat cushins, especially in the Bush economy.

  85. Late notice. by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
    Much of the problem that fatwallet is having is due to late notice. From what I can see, their lawyers still haven't seen the notice.

    I don't know about other jurisdictions, but in BC, a notice served after 4:30 isn't considered delivered until after 8:00am the next business day... I think it's intended to prevent stupidity like this. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that Best Buy timed their email to arrive after the lawyers had gone home.

    There's nothing like the fear of the unknown to get people to do stupid things.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  86. Thanks to the Bush economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll be working for triple time!
    Well if I want to I may take the week off(with pay) and mumble something about how little I'm making and wait for the BIG FAT Raise!
    Eat shit and die loser get some skills!

  87. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by volkris · · Score: 1

    Absolutely

  88. Who needs Best Buy anyway? by $criptah · · Score: 1, Troll

    BestBuy is nothing but a shit hole. When the chain came to our area, I was happy to see it because Circuit City did not cut it for me. I hoped to see a better selection, lower prices and somewhat educated sales people. Yeah, right...

    What we have here is a complete clusterfuck that is full of high school dropouts, stupid managers and anal security folks who check my bags everytime I come there. The prices are not as good as on PriceWatch and the service is poor. In fact, I am not going to purchase a single item from them after one of the sales people told my friend that a more expensive video card had a longer life span than the cheaper one (ATI 9800 was the cheaper card in this case).

    I have to admit, their initial DVD collection was impressive compared to what their competitors had to offer. But it all changed after I got a high-speed internet connection.

    1. Re:Who needs Best Buy anyway? by beakburke · · Score: 1

      No store will regularly be able to beat pricewatch. Stores have overhead that website's don't have. What stores offer is instant gratification that is hard for mail order type businesses to offer.

      --
      ----- Question authority, but not ours. Hate the man, but we're not him.
  89. Stop arguing for laziness with false dichotomies. by jbn-o · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If you think you can avoid them [companies that hurt you] totally, good luck living off your home farm, and walking everywhere.. its not practical.

    A common argument tactic is to push the debate into a false dichotomy--all or nothing--is a commonly used one. We see this with the MPAA/RIAA in copyright extension and copy prevention techniques (which attempt to keep you from making even non-infringing copies). In this instance, since you can't avoid doing business with all the companies that hurt you, you are somehow ethically justified in avoiding none of them. With this logic it's okay to throw up your hands in disgruntlement then pay to see the next Star Wars movie, buy proprietary software, or the next flashy tech trinket you want.

    Don't fall for this trap. Nobody is asking you to avoid all companies that harm you. You can choose to avoid some of them and still lead a perfectly productive and entertained life. Start with the easy ones like major movie and record publishers. You might even save a few bucks in the process (which you might choose to spend on organizations and artists that aren't trying to restrict your freedom to share). With other goods and services, you can find alternatives. You can tell businesses that don't hurt you why you're willing to buy stuff from them instead of their competitor. Don't let the best be the enemy of the good.

  90. Alternative Reading: Bad Prices. by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 1

    Can we all just interpret this to mean that Best Buy admits their prices are higher than their competition?

    After all, if their prices were lower they would want to tell everyone so people would shop there, right? ;-)

    --
    'Sensible' is a curse word.
  91. It Doesnt by doormat · · Score: 1

    The goal is to SCARE fatwallet into removing prices. Sale prices are FACTS and you cant copyright FACTS. The NFL cant copyright the outcome of a football game (Team X 30, Team Y 27), because it is a fact that Team X beat Team Y, however they can and do copyright the tv/radio description of the game.

    --
    The Doormat

    If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    1. Re:It Doesnt by Random832 · · Score: 1

      what i'm confused on is how they seem to manage to copyright the game itself (i.e. no-one gets to independently describe it)

      --
      We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
    2. Re:It Doesnt by doormat · · Score: 1

      they dont. if my friend doesnt see a great play and I describe it i'm not breaking copyright. If I'm the 5 o'clock news, i cant w/o permission due to public performance rights (I cant rebroadcast the highlights). Fair use might be an issue, I doubt the NFL would sue me for talking about a great play on my blog, as long as its not play by play.

      --
      The Doormat

      If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    3. Re:It Doesnt by Random832 · · Score: 1

      If there are "public performance rights" attached to _any_ description of the game, not just _their_ description, i don't see how, as you claim, "they dont" claim to have a copyright on the facts of how the game went.

      --
      We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
  92. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
    >Is it the primary purpose of society/government/law to protect business?

    > What about the rest of us, who are 'merely' people, and not incorporated profit-driven organisations?

    We are employed by those businesses, and live off their goods and services.

  93. Time for mirrors by DiveX · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've already mirrored the information on my meager ISP webspace: http://web.tampabay.rr.com/mblitch/bf2003/

    Other mirrors are up. Use the example of bittorrent and help spread the load and information. I have not seen nor read any complaints from Best Buy, so I do not know what their issue may be.

    http://www.andy-akb.com/bf/

    http://www.uswebstreet.com/~cmptrdude1/default.a sp ?id=home

    http://cpanel19.gzo.com/~every/blackfriday/

    http://www.quepons.com/blackfriday.html

    --
    Cave, wreck, and deep diver.
    1. Re:Time for mirrors by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

      note, lots of these sites are buckling to best buy and removing content!

      http://www.andy-akb.com/bf/bb.html

      some don't tell you that bb has been removed, but you'll not see it anywhere on the sites. i've been able to find a _few_ places where it is. frankly there's nothing i see there really worth interest except perhaps a video game, but maybe i'll settle for last years version somewhere else.

  94. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Milo77 · · Score: 1

    no we haven't, we've just become more specific - want we want is to further the advancement of American society.

  95. If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bonus by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Informative

    One thing to know...

    If you have advanced knowledge of what Best Buy will put on sale 2 weeks from now, you can buy that item today from them at the higher price, and then claim the 110% price protection offer they make to get an additional 10% of the discount. In fact, you can do the same to Circuit City using Best Buy's sale, or vice-versa because Circuit City has the same "price protection" policy.

    Therefore, they don't want you to be able to see their price drops coming... and that's why sale info is top secret until the day the sale goes into effect, at which point it's public info.

  96. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by phiwum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The primary purpose of government/law is to further the advancement of society; but unfortunately sometimes we lose sight of that.

    Maybe we lose sight of that because damned few of us agreed that was the purpose to begin with.

    Some of us might even wonder whether the "advancement of society" was a meaningful phrase at all.

    --
    Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
  97. MOD THIS GUY UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    This is the best way to screw those Best Buy assholes!

    Buy the items on the leaked list NOW then return on Black Friday to claim your price protection discount.

    I love capitalism!

  98. Ahem... by Bullseye_blam · · Score: 1

    When when the politicians realize they've created a monster?

  99. Parent poster links scat site with infinite popups by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

    Fucking bastard! That link was foul!

  100. Re:If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Keep in mind most of the deals are via large rebates, and those rebates are probably only valid for dates X through Y, and I bet X is on the day after turkey day. So while you may get a lower price, you probably wouldn't get the rebate.

    Nice thinking, though.

  101. Speed trap location tip-offs by ssstraub · · Score: 1

    I saw an interview with a few police officers on the local news channel here in Milwaukee, WI. The officers were neither for nor against these speed trap websites. They basically said as long as people slow down in the problem areas, they don't have a problem with it.

    1. Re:Speed trap location tip-offs by djupedal · · Score: 1

      Your point is valid, in that anything helping to slow down individual drivers is a good thing. If these kinds of sites help in that regard, then they are a positive element...which is my point.

      In this case, 'they' are assumed to be the 'crats and the insurance companies which assume reduced revenue from fewer tickets....revenue from evil-doers, rather than uplifted safety from sensible drivers. Why do you think they call them 'traps'...

  102. BestBuy needs to take Logic 101 by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    How the hell is posted what's on newspaper ads a violation of the DMCA? It's not as if the postings themselves circumvent a copy protection mechanism. Hell, newspapers aren't copy-protected, let alone the ads themselves.

    In fact, in some cases you can see the ads in their entirety online (http://newspaperads.mercurynews.com/ for example). It's where I get Fry's ads (remember the fiasco with Fry's Electronics and Fry's Ad Website, a non-profit community site that posted scans of frys ad so ppl at work or school and those don't have immediate access to the newspaper can see what's on sale, etc.)

    O well....this black friday thing with BestBuy isn't new. They did this a year ago too. Like the old Japanese saying goes, "only death cures stupidity."

  103. The Black Fiday ad wasn't the only posting removed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Sunday, November 16th weekly ad was also pulled Saturday morning. This is worse because the early edition of the Sunday paper was already available with the Best Buy ad included.

    The BF posting only listed about 8 items.

  104. Re:YUO FAEL IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, if the moderators don't rein in the goatse and kiddie porn, I'm going to stop coming here. I don't know how Slashdot makes its money, but I won't be helping with it anymore.

    That stuff, like the people who post it, comes from the bottom of the hull.

    If that is what Slashdot is about, then I'm outta here.

  105. Isn't this a trade secret? by davegust · · Score: 1

    Isn't this sort of potential disclosure of trade secrets covered by existing law? Can't Best Buy claim that the information was stolen? It seems that a court would rule that since any disclosure of such information serves no public interest, the information is the exclusive property of Best Buy.

    1. Re:Isn't this a trade secret? by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      Disclosure of trade secrets only applies when the disclosing party had a duty not to disclose. That means, almost always, that they had a signed non-disclosure agreement. The other case would be where the information was obtained illegally and the disclosing party knew it was obtained illegally. In short, it's BestBuy's responsibility to keep it's secrets secret, and if they don't that's not Fatwallet's problem.

  106. Rebate-Schmebait by mabu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What annoys me are all these mail-in rebate promotions these companies use. When you factor in all the added wasted time and the fact that the company holds onto your money so long and it's like pulling teeth getting it back, it's not worth it.

    Rebates are taxes on laziness, or more appropriately a false-advertising campaign designed to target people who aren't inclined to jump through the hoops necessary to get the rebates. If the company does an "instant rebate" at the time of purchase, that's another matter, but my policy is I do NOT buy any product that promises a certain price "after rebate" - that's BS. What I pay at the POS is the price of the product and I'm not giving the manufacturer additional information or worrying about documentation, mailing crap and keeping track of that malarky. I encourage everyone else to avoid any product promotions involving rebates so we can send a message to these retailers that we're not going to play their stupid false advertising game.

  107. They have no case... by DroopyStonx · · Score: 1

    Who cares if people know what the exact items on sale are gonna be? If anything, it helps Best Buy. I mean, if I knew that a certain video card I wanted was gonna be on sale, I'd plan to buy it from them.

    They're gonna tell us the items on sale anyway.

    It amazes me how Best Buy, or anyone else, thinks this is remotely illegal. This world is populated with whining babies.

    --
    We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
    1. Re:They have no case... by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      >Who cares if people know what the exact items on
      >sale are gonna be?

      The retailers care, because this means their competitors can simply price the items down a percent or ten less.

      In practice, it doesn't really matter, because the prices are not as important as the products the buyers chose, and all that was done up to a year ago.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  108. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it is in the government's interest to let FatWallet continue as is. The internet is only going to continue to expand consumer information, so business plans that rely on hiding information from the costumer are going to fail. Best to let it happen slowly so that these stores can get used to it and change their business plan to compensate.

  109. Re:If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    This is actually a pretty nasty way of using an anti-competetive tactic against them. If you study game theory, you can see that the 110% protection they offer really only allows both stores to sell the product for more, and is thus anti-competetive (e.g. the Nash equillibria rises when they use this trick).

  110. We do not plan on releasing information by Chief+Mucky+Muck · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wanted to make a couple points perfectly clear. When we rec'd the dmca notification and electronic delivery of a copy of a subpoena, it was late on Friday night. To be on the safe side, we acted to remove the specified information to remove any potential liability. (as legal counsel was not immediately available for guidance) Saturday was spent putting together the legal team, the real work starts tonight and tomorrow. Last year, Wal-Mart backed down before we filed our Motion to Quash - it remains to be seen what Best Buy's attitude will be in the battle of intellectual property counsel. We certainly do not believe that there is a legitimate copyright issue at hand, but as I had stated to Best Buy before information was even posted on our site, the potential for "trade secret" does exist here, but it is their responsibility to protect their intellectual property. Once a trade secret is made public, trade secret protection is no longer available. I am not a lawyer, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night - But this is where the current thought pattern is - stay tuned for more details early this week. Tim Storm President FatWallet, inc.

  111. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, that's just too tin-foil for me. What do you mean "wouldn't allow it"? If you could put together a stable business model where a cooperative could sustainably produce chips -- yeah, it would be allowed...what conceivable way could it be stopped? What possible rationalle would the powers that be have to WANT to stop it?

  112. This is trade secret! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    Some one somewhere is violating their NDA! It takes time to print all those ads up...the printers are raking the bucks but not enforcing the security of the information they are printing.

    Eventually, they will have to get past DMCA's and start suing the releasers directly...lots of work.

    The whole "black Friday" thing is a marketing game to get you in the stores. There's only so much time to get in and out of each store...that's the "hook" to the great deals. You have to decide which deals you think are more important and generally plan for only 2-3 major shops for the day..with the long lines and all. That makes you try to get other gifts on your list that AREN'T on sale jsut to get the shopping done! that's how they get the $$$$. Posting everything online weeks ahead of time isn't really fair...but I guess from a marketing standpoint, they really should just deal with it...or stop whining after the ad is released publicly....but the issue right now is that the ad is NOT PUBLIC YET. So they have every right to C&D. Best thing would be to force every single printer to make new adds with different prices 3-4 days beore the holiday...FOR FREE!

  113. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember WACO and Ruby Ridge? The gubbermint doesn't want competition. Threatening to replace big companies with communist cooperatives threatens big governments traditional money flow.

  114. OT: Cave Diving? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Cave diver? You are a crazy bastard. Was at Ginnie Springs, FL one evening while they were pulling out the corpse of one less lucky diver. I understand that when things go awry and panic sets in, one dive buddy is often found ~30 ft. back in the cave from the other corpse-- killed by his partner for his tank.

    Of course, it is probably exhilarating as hell and I would love to dive. However, my damn pulmonologist keeps harping about pulmonary barotrauma and asthma. Fuck it...

  115. Re:Best Buy Black Friday Ad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Incorrect, according to the time stamp, the other guy posted it 5 minutes before you.

  116. Parent Post ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny, maybe. Off-topic, yes. Insightful?! Hell no!

    While the DCMA is clearly the wrong route to stop the leak of information, the pre-release of sale pricing could hurt Best Buy. Best Buy spends a lot of money calculating "lift" or increased sales certain ad placement will yield. Not only could this effect the calculations by having more people hold off to buy a product at the sale price -- it also gives competitors an advantage. Best Buy might have legal grounds to go after the site for publishing "trade secrets". This almost boarders on corporate espionage; someone is stealing sensitive internal data. It would make more sense if Best Buy offered to not press charges if the site gives up their source. After all -- who has more lawyers? Even if they can't win BB could make the little guy's life a living legal hell.

    1. Re:Parent Post ... by WNight · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's all we ever hear these days...

      "While this isn't technically a violation, maybe it should be because it could cost [Big Business X] some money."

      That's a pretty fucking lame excuse. How about they get the same protection under the law as everyone else and if they want to keep a secret, they just don't fucking tell anyone?

    2. Re:Parent Post ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I'm saying is that publishing this data isn't acting in good faith -- someone is breaking company non-disclosure to provide that information. What "lame excuse" does that person have for breaking contract? This isn't a big faceless company, I have a lot of friends that work there. If it wasn't pre-press then I'd have no problem.

  117. Suing you for sources! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

    Hopefully they will sue you for sources! After all, that info is under NDA somwhere, someone violated that contract...and you are a business, not a member of the press...you have no "right" to free speech here. After they sue you for sources, they should make YOU & your source pay for new ads with different prices...the ones you reported were not "offically" released, they are under no obligation to honor them under any consumer protection law! Part of the agreement of course would be to never publish Best Buy prices again...which you would willingly sign...should they sue you for the extra liablity or lost sales...lawyers on commission are very good at "numbers"! Sorry to burst your bubble.

    1. Re:Suing you for sources! by Chief+Mucky+Muck · · Score: 5, Informative

      Thanks for your comments, however off base they may be.

      The issue at hand is that Best Buy filed a DMCA notice - not a c&d. This means that they are claiming copyrihght on the information.

      A DMCA notification allows the notifier to subpoena the information regardless of the merit of the copyright claim, that is the issue we are dealing with here.

      If this were another type of Intellectual property issue, such as trade secret, Best Buy would have to file a lawsuit against the John Doe, and then subpoena the information based upon the lawsuit.

      However, in this case, it appears as though the information was available elsewhere before it was posted on FatWallet, which it could be argued that the information was already "in the public", so the trade secret claims would be tough to prove.

      Any intellectual property claim would be against the person making the post on our site, as we would have immunity thanks to the commudications decency act.

      Thanks again for your comments

      Tim Storm FatWallet, inc.

  118. Debit card protections by way2trivial · · Score: 4, Informative
    Visa mandates banks offer the same protection with visa debit cards as credit

    Mastercard explicitly denies the same, but mentions on their website many banks choose to do so voluntarily.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:Debit card protections by larry+bagina · · Score: 1
      That's not true. By law, if your credit card is stolen, your maximum liability is $50. There is no such limit with a debit card. Also, a debit card immediately draws money from your acount. A credit card is a monthly bill. If you dispute a credit transaction, you don't have to pay it until it is resolved. If you dispute a debit card transaction, it's already been paid.

      Most banks will essentially set a liability limit of 0 for stolen credit and debit cards, but credit cards have the extra legal protection and extra protection of not yet having been paid.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    2. Re:Debit card protections by way2trivial · · Score: 1
      It is true,
      I did not say it was the LAW, I said it was VISA, I was quoting contractural requirements.

      Visa Requires it of Banks
      Mastercard does not

      http://www.usa.visa.com/personal/secure_with_visa/ zero_liability.html
      "The Zero Liability policy covers all Visa credit and debit card transactions processed over the Visa network-online or off. The only transactions not covered under the Zero Liability policy are commercial card, ATM, and non-Visa-branded PIN transactions."

      http://global.mastercard.com/about/press/protect ion.html
      " Your legal dispute rights are not the same when you pay with a debit card as with a credit card, though most debit card issuers voluntarily offer similar protection. If you pay by check or money order, by the time you realize there is a problem your money will probably be gone. "

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  119. I can explain by geekoid · · Score: 1

    I used to have to deal with the math involved in credit rating.

    Having, and using, a major credit card shows lenders you can handle your finances. so you get points for that. the more points, the 'better' your credit.

    Now you can loose points if you debt is too high. Generally, what is too high depends on your income.

    When you use a debit card, you have just given somebody complete access to your bank accouts.
    Not even considering intentional fraud, how often are mistakes made? you buy something for 9.99, and then get charged 99.99. that would come out of you bank account immediatly, and you would be screwed.

    If you use a debit card, I suggest it is off a seconf accout that you transfer oney into.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  120. Re:If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    Therefore, they don't want you to be able to see their price drops coming... and that's why sale info is top secret until the day the sale goes into effect, at which point it's public info.

    WTF? If it is so "top secret", why is it customary for Sunday newspaper inserts to be sent to the delivery folks on Wednesday or Thursday before the date?

    And best buy's 'price protection' would only match the price up to 30 days after the sale, it doesn't give you 110%.

    Get a clue...

  121. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

    What do you mean "wouldn't allow it"?

    I mean they'd use their monopoly powers to put the cooperative out of business.

    If you could put together a stable business model where a cooperative could sustainably produce chips -- yeah, it would be allowed...what conceivable way could it be stopped?

    Patent lawsuits, DMCA and copyright lawsuits, predatory pricing, collusive deals with other hardware manufacturers...

    What possible rationalle would the powers that be have to WANT to stop it?

    Campaign donations, bribes, protection of stock market investments, pressure from local constituents, tit for tat deals with others who have one of the reasons above...

  122. My letter to besy buy by MrLint · · Score: 1

    It has come to my attention that Best Buy is attempting to abuse the DMCA to stifle the release of the 'black friday' sale specials, on the site fatwallet.com. As I do all my product and buying research and nearly all of my equipment purchases online, this quite frankly, ticks me off. Not only will I not by patronizing best buy in 'black friday' I will not be doing so ever again.

    Perhaps you will learn that being asinine does not win you friends.

  123. Re:If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bo by freeweed · · Score: 1

    Therefore, they don't want you to be able to see their price drops coming... and that's why sale info is top secret until the day the sale goes into effect, at which point it's public info.

    Then maybe they shouldn't leave this information publically available on their webservers ahead of the sale.

    Which, from what I've gathered, is what happened. I RTFA, and most of the comments here, and yet not one person has explained just what happened here, other than "fatwallet removed some info due to a DMCA threat by Best Buy".

    Perhaps submitters could try linking to actual information instead of a message board filled with "comment removed" next time.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  124. actually a good use for once by synonymous+w+coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hmm, let's see. This is supposed to be private information at the moment. Should a person (or a company) have the right to keep sensitive information private if it poses no harm to anyone? I'm inclined to answer yes. I understand that these are prices that people willbe paying in a few weeks, but these are just estimates right now, technically. You can't go to the store and buy it for that price now, so the public has no reason to know these prices.

    "But I won't buy it now if I can get it cheaper in 2 weeks!" Argument: invalid. Try watching Trading Places starring Eddie Murphy. Maybe it will teach you something about how markets work, and it is a very humorous movie.

    Are bait and switch tactics wrong? Yes. Has Best Buy ever used this tactic in my experience with them? No.
    Turkey Friday sales are intended to get customers to choose to spend ther valuable time at the store that you are operating over another store. The more things that have awesome sales at your store, the more customers your store will have lined up waiting before the doors open. Limited item sales are solely meant to encourage people to come to your store first (where they will probably spend the most money AND buy everything that you offer that they were planning on buying that day in an attempt to limit the number of stores they have to go to).
    Last year I went to BB's opening on Turkey Friday, and they told me how manyof the item I wanted that was on sale they had, and they even were making a waiting list for people to get on for items that had al been claimed in case people decided against buying them.

    Yes, I believe the DMCA is a fairly absurd law. However, it is actually being put to a good use in this case. This is sensitive, private information. The non-release of it isn't harming anyone or truly impinging on their freedoms - i.e. nobody's child is going to be kidnapped as a direct result of this information being withheld.

    As for the argument that the information should have been protected better, what the hell do you think they are doing now? Geez. This lawsuit is obviously just for show. Get a clue. This is protection (although arguably not the best).

    Boycotting Turkey Friday sales? If you are going to buy a product, why would you avoid shopping for it when you will probably get the best deal on it?

    Oh, by the way... companies without profit margins?!? Some of you are so completely brilliant that it astounds me. It has been tried, and it failed (/is failing) miserably in every instance. The general name for this type of economy is Communism. I believe you've heard of it.

    I didn't want to end with the Communism comment, but I'm lazy. :p

    1. Re:actually a good use for once by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hmm, let's see. This is supposed to be private information at the moment. Should a person (or a company) have the right to keep sensitive information private if it poses no harm to anyone? I'm inclined to answer yes.

      I'm inclined to answer yes to that question too, but that isn't the question in this case. The question is, once BestBuy has failed to keep the information private, do they have a right to force someone else to take on the duty of non-disclosure even though they haven't signed a non-disclosure agreement? That, I'm inclined to answer a big loud "No!" to. If BestBuy wants to keep their prices private, the onus is on them to keep them private, not the rest of us.

    2. Re:actually a good use for once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If BestBuy wants to keep their prices private, the onus is on them to keep them private, not the rest of us."

      EXACTLY. If a trade secret (if you can call this a TS) was misappropriated, then Best Buy can go after who ever misappropriated it for civil and criminal penalties, but fatwallet probably didn't have this trade secret only to misappropriate to us...the DMCA argument is total BS by the way...

  125. Re:Suing you for sources! (spell check - doh!) by Chief+Mucky+Muck · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Make that Communications, not commudications

  126. Nope-OP was correct by TuballoyThunder · · Score: 2, Informative

    The original poster was correct, assuming that you are not carrying a balance. Most credit card providers will not charge you any interest on purchases if you pay 100% of your balance when it is due. Thus, your money remains in your checking account until you pay the credit card bill earning a whopping 1.5% - 2.2% APY interest on a money market account or 0.5% - 1.5% APY interest on a interest-bearing checking account.

  127. Re:If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bo by LostCluster · · Score: 1

    This is a replay of what happened last year. FatWallet deletes pre-release information as soon as it gets a DMCA threat... because although it's questionable whether the DMCA is the right law to apply, it is clear that this is information FatWallet is not allowed to have on its webboard because it is a trade secret until it is published. It's not worth fighting it because this would be a bad choice of testcase...

  128. Re:Slashdot people are the joke here by XO · · Score: 1

    Jesus Christ, moderated as flamebait, because apparently everyone that reads this place has the same rabid opinion as everyone else? fuck, I might as well just go read Google News.

    --
    "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
  129. Re:YUO FAEL IT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    too much kiddie porn and goatse on /. lately

    Too much kiddie porn is never enough for the typical shashbot.

    Ans don't forget, /. has a large European base. They especially love the scat-kiddie porn.

  130. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by nyseal · · Score: 1

    We are ALL incorportated into profit driven organizations. Do you have a job? They are for profit; if not, you would not have one. Do you purchase goods and services? Hello, they are for profit as well. I think where you're going with this is that business does not care about the 'people', however without the people there is no business. THAT'S where corporations have lost their perspective . They consider the 'people' as a burden on profits and that's just stupid.

    --
    [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
  131. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by perljon · · Score: 1
    We don't have to guess on this one.

    It appears it's not about advancement of society, and only about protecting business when it promote's the general welfare or secures the blessings of liberty.
    • in order to form a more perfect union
    • establish justice
    • insure domestic tranquility
    • provide for the common defense
    • promote the general welfare
    • and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity
    -- U.S. Constitution


    --
    This isn't the sig you are looking for... Carry on...
  132. Morals versus ethics.... by valdis · · Score: 1

    Exactly my point. High ethics, low morals - they'd do *anything* possible *within the rules of the system* to get their client the winning side of the case. Creative use of an ambiguity in a law is fine and dandy - actually *breaking* one is a big no-no.

    Think - if they were immoral *and* unethical, we'd hear a lot more about lawyers doing things like evidence tampering and the like.

    (For the AD&D fans out there - ethics is the lawful/chaotic angle, morals is the good/evil angle. Most lawyers are so lawful neutral (at least as far as their profession is concerned) it's sickening - they don't care at all about good/evil as long as the rules are followed...)

  133. Not a laughing matter by Laconian · · Score: 1

    But what if FatWallet loses? This would set a horrible precedent.

  134. poisoned tree, privacy by pruss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1. While facts are not copyrightable as far as I know (IANAL), still isn't there a "fruit of the poisoned tree" doctrine? One shouldn't profit from illegal activity. If someone violated BestBuy's copyright, e.g., by photocopying a flyer before release, then there would be a legal (and certainly moral!) problem with FatWallet profiting from the information derived from the illegally made copy.

    2. Normally /. is all for privacy. But isn't this really a privacy issue? Someone has taken BestBuy's private information and published it. That BestBuy is a corporation doesn't mean that their privacy doesn't matter: after all, a corporation is just constituted by a bunch of individuals (shareholders or owners and their employees). I am myself rather minimalistic on alleged rights to privacy, but anybody who thinks I have a right not to have the contents of my private documents published on the web by hackers should surely accord that right to BestBuy.

    1. Re:poisoned tree, privacy by RedSteve · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but I believe that in response to your first question, it literally depends on how many copies the person who copied the original flyer made, and how those copies were used. If you will recall, copyright law allows for fair use. That generally means a single copy for personal, educational, and non-profit use. The assumption being made in this whole thread is that the people at FatWallet are not posting a PDF or other proprietary copy of the circular; they are only posting the facts that X item will be on sale for $Y on the Friday after Thanksgiving.

      So, ironically, the single copy made by the person who leaked BB's info, that was made only so he or she could take it home and post the prices to the internet, is the one thing here that is actually protected under copyright. Consequently, there is no poison fruit.

      (And yes, depending on how FatWallet makes their money, you might be tempted to argue that they abused the fair use principle when they made the copy. But again, the copy was not disseminated for their profit: the FACTS were.)

      To your second question, I don't know that the analogy between your private documents and Best Buy's embargoed ads necessarily holds up. Unless you are going to be advertising the contents of your checkbook to the public, but not until the day after Thanksgiving, the comparison is moot. Best Buy will be releasing that information (and in fact they already have released it to their printers). They just want control of when that public information is released.

      Incidentally, when I was a paperboy, way back in the day, I would get the Sunday advertising circulars on Friday afternoon so that I could stuff them into the papers on Sunday morning. (It is one way the papers saved money -- distribute the labor of stuffing). The upside was that my mom always knew what was going to be on sale the next week, and would make a similar decision of whether to buy this Saturday or next week.

      The fact that we had the same system in place for the Thanksgiving papers (we got those circulars on Monday or Tuesday) only underscores how insecure this information has always been. The difference today as opposed to 1988?

      That damn pesky internet!

    2. Re:poisoned tree, privacy by pruss · · Score: 1

      Whether this particular instance of copying would count as fair use is an open question, I suspect. I am not sure it counts as "non-profit use" if one is making a copy in order to use the information on it for profit. But you might be right. (Of course that assumes copyright is the only issue. There might have been some implicit or explicit contract violated, for instance.)

      On the privacy side, it is not uncommon for an individual to want to keep things private for a while. Someone throwing a surprise party for a friend, a person planning to propose marriage, a person waiting for a suitable time to break a bad piece of news, or a professor preparing an exam are all cases where an individual would wish to keep some information private despite planning to make it public.

      Nor would it be OK for you to reveal the current contents of my checkbook if I, for some eccentric reason, had a habit of posting my checkbook data on the Internet six months after the fact. Or suppose that I always posted my old canceled credit card numbers online. That would not give you the right to most my credit card numbers before they've been canceled.

  135. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by ilikecaffeine · · Score: 1
    I'd say the primary purpose of government/law is to give citizens the tools they need to protect thsemselves and their property. I think the establishment of communist and socialist governments argue against this thesis.
    Nah, Communism just changes the definitions of self and property.
  136. You're basically wrong by alizard · · Score: 1
    Bill Gates wealth was grandfathered in? I thought he made took a chance and decided to a open a software company, turned out his chance worked out because he provided a good product and figured out the best way to distrubute it before anyone else.

    He had rich parents with rich friends... which made financing a company a lot easier.

    Good product? You a tard or something?

    As for distribution, remember the antitrust action in which MS was declared a monopoly? Bush didn't buy the EU government antitrust people.

  137. Thanksgiving?? by Pez69 · · Score: 1

    wasn't that a month ago?????

    --

    Forever live the fighters!
  138. bestbuysux.com by bert33 · · Score: 1
    Hilarious...
    ...She has no idea how to do her job, and has no idea how to interact with people. She is too busy calling her husband (who works at Best Buy also) and probably telling him to go buy daipers for their disgusting ass child that we all had to hear about everyday she was there. Too bad she didn't die during the labor. I am surprised she could give birth thought.. hell I am surprised that anything can be found with that fat ass in the way. Her ass was more attention getting than she was. Too bad it looked like a pillow that someone with cleats on just ran over
    --
    These people look deep into my soul and assign me a number based on the order I joined.
  139. whoops... bestbuysux.org. nm. by bert33 · · Score: 1

    http://www.bestbuysux.org/html/com10-03.html

    --
    These people look deep into my soul and assign me a number based on the order I joined.
  140. I wouldn't mind knowing the specials... by RyoShin · · Score: 1

    Seeing as how I work at a local Best Buy, in computers no less. I'm tasked to be a runner on Black Friday (day after Turkey Day to the uninitiated), which means that I go around busting my ass getting everyone the computer bundle (or just plain computer) they get. I also work more than 10 hours straight that day. It makes me want to cry now.

    Screw dress code, I'm wearing tennis shoes.

  141. Who cares what you know by djupedal · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Sorry, I'd never join the Young Republicans.

    The best way to live outside the law is to stay within it.

  142. In a galaxy far away... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...how are you, fatwallet.com? All your discounts are belong to us.

  143. consumerism means bankrupt values by JimmytheGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the endless pursuit of stuff is killing us and what's worse, it's making us shallower.

    I'm afraid that Coke is a pretty good shorthand reference for American culture. American cities are hidious, with maybe two exceptions (San Fran, New Orleans). The sole urban design goal seems to be the breakdown of community and conversion of citizens to consumers. We've lost a tremendous amount of personal time to work. Is that a good trade-off? What about pro-family values? Can you raise your kids from work? Once they are fed, housed, and clothed, is the delta income worth the -delta face time? Did you get a choice re: -delta face time?

    GDP is not a sound measure of societal health. I don't think it's even a good measure of economic health. Where externalities aren't monetized (you aren't charged for pollution), but cancer treatments are, you have a skewed measurement and eventually warped values. /end rant gotta get some sleep

    1. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by ashkar · · Score: 1

      I hate to tell you this, but New Orleans is being slowly swallowed by the Gulf, and San Fran, I hear, is going to fall into the ocean. You might want to find some other American cities to appreciate.

    2. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by djrogers · · Score: 1
      American cities are hidious, with maybe two exceptions (San Fran, New Orleans).
      Interesting that you would pick the two cities in America where one would be least likely to get arrested (or even looked at) for engaging in public sex acts, DUI, drug abuse/trafficking, and other things that the vast majority of Americans would consider unhealthy behavior. Methinks we have a different dfinition of 'hideous'...
      --
      Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
    3. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a gross oversimplification of New Orleans. As far as public sex goes... that's really only the tourist, so it will stop once you stop comming here (no pun intended). People get arrested for it(!) but it true the city isn't quite sure how to handle it. Do we arrest the tourist, who bring in money or just let them go. It seems the officals go back on forth... sometimes cracking down and sometimes not.

      I don't know why the parent says New Orleans is not hidious, police corruption alone is reason to consider this city "hidious". In the 80s the FBI busted New Orelans cops for taking hits out on people. Recentily the cops were busted for fixing reports to make it look like New Orleans has less crime than it does.

      The French Quarter is interesting, with law keeping out chain resturants and stores, which is why it doesn't look like everywhere else. Local music is really good, maybe linked to the drug abuse :)

      http://www.morning40.com/ is a personaly favorite

      Anyway... I'm just saying, things aren't as simple as this post and the parent suggest.

      -Jeff

    4. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by Twister002 · · Score: 1

      Been to Seattle recently?

      If you have, you'd notice that Seattle is broken into distinct districts. Fremont, Ballard, Ravenna, Laurelhurst, First Hill, Capitol Hill, Belltown, etc... Each with it's own distinct personality, community centers, festivals, and people.

      --
      "For a successful technology, honesty must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." -Feynman
    5. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by Surt · · Score: 1

      Have you seen san fran? It's hideous.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    6. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by DCheesi · · Score: 1

      San Fran is actually a very nice city to visit; but living there is another matter. Like many previously cool cities, success has ruined it by bringing in the rich carpetbaggers and driving up the cost of living beyond the reach of the very people who made it cool in the first place. The only difference is that in this case it wasn't tourism that did it; it was the latest "gold rush" tech boom.

      The hideous cities are the obvious ones, like Detroit, but also those with massive urban sprawl and congestion (like DC). Most of those cities have no defining character, and their size and sprawling nature make driving both necessary and painful at the same time.

    7. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 1

      Agreed. New Orleans is actually pretty damn disgusting; the French Quarter is covered in this black sludge and Bourbon Street is as commercial as it gets. The rest of the city looks like... any other industrialized city, as NO has been for the past few hundred years. Bad example of a beautiful city; the place is a dirty tourist trap :)

    8. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with you. SF is a great place to visit, but it's not so fantastic to live there. There are many major major exceptions within the city limits, but many places around here are just not that cool, especially at night.

      But as someone who lives twenty minutes out of San Francisco, but who works in the city, I can tell you that my daily visits are things that I wouldn't give up for anything in the world. Bay area suburbs are what keeps San Francisco so great. Keeping big cities like Chicago in mind as a point of reference, I prefer living close to, but not in, SF hands down.

    9. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by tomocoo · · Score: 1

      The reason why America is the world's leader is because of the fact we take our increases in productivity (technology in the office, for example) and keep working the same amount of time. This is why we have a relatively low quality of life compared to, say, the French.

    10. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by BurKaZoiD · · Score: 0

      ...American cities are hidious, with maybe two exceptions (San Fran, New Orleans)...

      No offense there chief, but New Orleans SUCKS. It's dirty, it's ugly, and that town farking SMELLS like dead stuff and old beer cans.

    11. Re:consumerism means bankrupt values by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      *Anything* in excess is not good. Nonetheless, I think you greatly overstate the problem in this case.

      If anything, America's biggest problem related to goods and the desire of goods is that we're not willing to put forth the effort to build the highest quality goods possible. With few exceptions, Americans consider foreign, imported products as the "best of breed". We'll pay much more for an "oriental rug" than we'll ever consider paying for a domestic carpet. It's common knowledge that the best luxury and sports cars come from Germany, Japan, or Italy. Our favorite electronics and computer products come from companies like Mitsubishi, Sony or Samsung. We even pay big bucks for imported chocolate, but consider the American equivalents as nothing more than "staple goods". (Which one's more prestigious, Hershey's or Godiva?)

      For these reasons, the more money we earn and spend on the "most desireable" products, the more of our money funnels itself out of the United States. This is fine if we're exporting roughly the same amount as we're importing - but I don't see that happening. Besides our farm produce, I'm not sure what America's really good at producing these days - and that's rather sad!

  144. Re:If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bo by Captain+Beefheart · · Score: 1

    Price protection very rarely applies to one-time- only discounts or clearance items. I dug around for the scoop at the Best Buy website, but it said "see store for details" instead of giving me the nitty gritty. I doubt, though, that they will do it. A competitor will be even less likely to price match, given the sales category of these items.

  145. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Feynt · · Score: 1
    Which organisation in the USA employs the most people?
    One would hope that your federal government is not being run on a for-profit basis.

    Of course, many products and services can be (and are) provided on a not-for-profit basis, provided by people who are gainfully employed. Quick examples: consider a church pastor, a scout leader, or a food bank director, none of whom are government employees and none of whom are working for profit.
    And in a for-profit business, the profit is normally claimed by the business owner(s), not the employees (who are considered an expense to be minimised).

  146. Re:If you see a Best Buy sale coming, you get a bo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nope, sorry. The price protection does not apply to the black friday sale, and the ads that go out will say so.

  147. Bzzzt. Fair? Free Markets need price information. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A free market does not operate efficiently unless there are knowledgable consumers and purchasers. This means not hiding prices from your customers or competitors. I don't know what "fair" has to do with it. Are you saying that anytime something decreases the potential profits of a company it is unfair? So you think fraud should be legal? Extortion? Shake-downs? Sometimes certain actions are not allowed even though they are good for a single company because they are bad for the economy as a whole. Maybe price disclosure should be one of them.

    And anyway, if they really wanted to keep this stuff a secret they should use trade secret law, not copyright or DMCA law. With trade secrets and NDAs they could legally control the disclosure of prices until they published them to the public.

  148. DMCA not for trade secrets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They could have sent a C&D for trade secret violations or contract violations. However they sent a DMCA takedown notice which means there is a copyright violation or there is a circumvention of a copy or access control mechanism. Maybe their lawyer is just stupid, but I doubt it. It's probably another WalMart case where they claim their prices are copyrightable.

  149. Newspaper ads ARE copy-protected by milliyear · · Score: 1

    I hate the DMCA as much as anybody, but let's do a reality check.

    Newpaper ads have time-sensitive copy protection. They are not publicly viewable until the date of the newspaper's publication. Anybody that admits they got Black Friday info from any step of the publication process openly admits to 'circumventing' the time-sensitive copy protection, and admits a basis for having DMCA used against them. Seems to me the way to get around this is to DENY the source came from anywhere in the publication process.

    After all, it's not the DATA the retailers are trying to keep secret. They publish it themselves, AT THE RIGHT (for them)TIME.

    It's the TIMING of the release. Maybe therein lies the answer to getting this info out legally.

    What if somebody didn't post this until Wednesday afternoon? Closed on Thanksgiving, so nobody to serve a cease and desist to until Friday, and by then they are publicly available, just in a more useable form if posted all together on the web.

    Of course, I could be wrong. :)

    1. Re:Newspaper ads ARE copy-protected by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

      errr...no.....newspapers are analog (so much for the digital portion of the digital millenium copyright act).

      and time isn't a copy-protection...it's a read-protection.

  150. Re:Google has some similar stories by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your IP address is 127.0.0.1. I *know* it is.

  151. It gets more serious before I realize? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you meant "than you realize" :)

  152. B2B or not B2B... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is the question.

    Oh yeah. Here is my TPS report, coversheet included.

  153. Nah, Nah, Nah, Boo-boo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's nothing wrong with a few homemade things.

    Instead of giving your tots an X-Box, teach them something about the real world and frustration: Give them a Rubic's Cube. It'll never get solved.

    No, wait. That was just my inner troll.

    Actually, what I really had in mind was this: Legos. Tinker Toys. Erector Sets. Go for Lego Mindstorms and scientific toys, too. Flex their brains a little. Get ant farms and bug collection kits. Heck, buy one of those new-fangled computers. Maybe a USB microscope from ThinkGeek. Get the critical thinking started early. Why?

    Do you want them to be part (MOO!) of (MOO!) the (MOO!) hurd (MOO!) at (MOO!) Walmart, or would you rather have them building, thinking, deconstructing, discovering, inventing, or whatevering something?

    At 7 years old, NOVA was really interesting. I walked around with more useless-to-me-at-the-moment scientific information at that age than most graduate students wish they could keep in their head. As I got older, I promptly forgot it, too. The point is, though, that now I'm a scientist, and it probably had more to do with the toys I had to play with than me waking up one day thinking "I'm going to contribute to the body of knowledge."

    Man. Now I want to go dig up all my air/water rockets and gyroscopes and things.

    1. Re:Nah, Nah, Nah, Boo-boo... by adamfranco · · Score: 1

      Right on,

      I guess that I was a bit simplistic in my post (late night writing). My gifts at christmas growing up were much as you describe. Legos, chemistry set, "Constructs", along with hand knit hats from grandma. One the best parts though, was that though I whined and demanded a Nintendo and more than 1 or 2 Transformers I was never given them. As a result, I spent indoor time with legos and outdoor time building miniature waterwheels/boats and such in the little creek nearby.

      The problem with consumerism is not that we want or buy things, but that the buying of things becomes the focus of what we do. By mid-childhood when my brother and I would ask for more legos it wasn't because my friend Matt just got the Pirate Island set, but because we had used up all of our raw materials building a city.

      Directly as a result of all this, I headed into science when I grew up.

      --
      "When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind." -- Bill Moyers
  154. Oh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know it's wonderful.

    I know it's complex.

    You should try particle physics some time.

    Oh. Wait. Multi-million dollar colliders would probably be chalked up as being somewhere in the neighborhood of "materialistic," huh? Does that disqualify me from having a deep understanding of life and the world around me?

    P.S. That demon/penis thing? Oh yes. It was funny.

  155. Sorry by Databass · · Score: 1


    Word on the street (no doubt obtained by violaing the DMCA) is that Wal-Mart is going to have a GameCube with Zelda:Wind Waker available for $74.95 from 6AM to Noon on Black Friday! I don't think I can pass that deal up!

  156. Yup, blame the victim... by TrollBridge · · Score: 1
    "Doesn't FatWallet have a right to make money too?"

    No, they don't have a right to make money.

    "Best Buy should have guarded their pricing info better."

    Yeah, and that rape victim shouldn't have worn that short skirt either, right?

    --
    There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
  157. So don't follow it! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
    If it's not a valid DMCA letter then don't follow it --it wasn't legal. In that case, it's not covered under copyright anyway! of course if it's not covered under copyright, then DMCA protections of the communication decency act don't apply to YOU either! You have no recourse for protection from somebody [corperate spy] breaking their NDA contract on your site...it could even be thought that you were a willing [perhaps paying?] accomplice in distrbuting that information. That makes you subject to any civil or criminal liability along with your source!

    So slap that baby back up there...show some spine...and wait for the lawyers to be pissed off enough to sue you properly! Of course the protections that following the "letter" give you are a little too good to pass up aren't they! That's why it was down in a hot minute.

    1. Re:So don't follow it! by Absoluttt · · Score: 1

      You use about 10 TOO MANY exclamation points in ANY of your responses to be taken seriously. Learn how to write. I'm suprised your responses weren't in all caps.

    2. Re:So don't follow it! by DarkEdgeX · · Score: 1

      Surprised they weren't modded down too. Since when does this fool think that only members of the press get copyright protection?

      --
      All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
  158. cash isn't better for most legitimate businesses.. by stomv · · Score: 1

    Vendors pay a fee regardless of the type of currency used.

    * Credit cards? Approx 3%, plus any chargebacks
    * Checks? Same deal -- CheckMate is a service that ensures checks have a legit number, and the merchant must still deal with bounced checks.
    * Cash? Big merchants have to pay for armored car service. Smaller merchants must still spend all the time counting and setting up deposits, as well as obtaining rolls of change. The banks aren't free moneychangers -- all of this as fees as well. More cash on hand also increases the liklihood of robbery, from outside or from an employee.

    Paying cash in a restaurant helps the waitress at the expense of the Federal Government by allowing her to not report 100% of earnings -- but short of tax evasion, there are few businesses that benefit from using cash.

  159. No, It LOWERS your credit rating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    10% of your credit score is based on how often people inquire to your credit rating. The more often the lower it is. People who use more credit are considered larger risks. Check out howstuffworks.com "How Credit Scores Work".

  160. A quick mirror by Obiwan+Kenobi · · Score: 1

    Here's a fast mirror, for those interested.

  161. No, fascist by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    The primary purpose of government is to protect people from criminals. Where are you from, Europe?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  162. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The primary purpose of government/law is to keep me from killing rich people.

  163. Does anyone have the Wal Mart Black Friday List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks to all who posted the Best Buy Black Friday List...does anyone have the Wal Mart Black Friday list or a link to it?

    Thanks!!

  164. It's not just the economy, stupid by indros13 · · Score: 1
    You make an excellent point about the impact of buying nothing on the economy, but you are operating under the assumption that what is good for the economy is necessarily good for me.

    In terms of material living standards, the glories of mass consumption have brought widespread availability of refrigerators, toasters, consumer electronics and cars. It has also had the amazing and contradictory effect of actually decreasing the number of Americans who say they are happy (in addition to having detrimental effects on the environment).

    Buy Nothing Day symbolizes the need for moderation, a juxtaposition to the "extreme shopping" motif of American society the other 364 days of the year.

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  165. Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hasn't Best Buy learned anything about lawsuits yet? http://www.geocities.com/zippy55512/bestbuy/

  166. And yet again, I won't shop them on that day by amigabill · · Score: 1

    Why exactly do they not want me to know what the prices are? I'm not going to get up early and wait in a really long line on the off chance that one of the sale items may possibly interest me. So guess what? Since I don't know for sure that anything I might be interested in is on sale, I'm not going, and they also lose sales on any other regular price items I might get while I'm there for the sale. Hey, if they make it hard/inconvenient/annoying to shop, it means they don't want my money, and I can certainly oblinge them in that.

  167. Black Friday - BestBuySux.com - BLANKET by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, so I'm an Anonymous Coward, but at least I'm saying -something- On Black Friday, I am going to the three Best Buy's in my area with small pieces of paper that say BESTBUYSUX.COM and putting them on all cars in the parking lot. Then running away, but then comming back :) If we can get enough people to do this, maybe it'll get the point across.

  168. Content Removed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure, but Content Removed, see first post seems a little Content Removed doesn't it? Isn't Content Removed supposed to be Content Removed under Content Removed? If I were Content Removed, I'd start Content Removed and Content Removed until Content Removed stopped Content Removed the customers. But then again, what do Content Removed know? I'm just a Content Removed with Content Removed and a sense of Content Removed. Ahh well.

  169. Re:Not really fair to disclose this information? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The primary purpose of government/law is to further the advancement of society; but unfortunately sometimes we lose sight of that.


    BZEERPPP! Wrong. The great fallacy of the age reasserts itself - the idea that everything must "advance" (usually defined as some sort of growing, eating, consuming, bloating, or complexifying behaviour).

    This kind of idea is at the root of the consumer culture. The function of society is to exist, not to change. The function of law/government is to manage societal interactions. Individuals or groups within the society may have other goals, but government,law, and society are essentially as purposeless as evolution itself.

    As that fat elitist bastard Edward Abbey said, "Growth without limits is the philosophy of a cancer cell."
  170. /reply to your sig/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry for the O/T reply, but the quote you have attributed to Shakespeare was actually said by Francis de S. Fenelon (1651 - 1715), French arch bishop.

  171. My knowledge of NO is confined to the French 1/4 by JimmytheGeek · · Score: 1

    and the Garden District, touristy as hell, I grant. I had no use for Bourbon St., but Royal is another matter. I didn't see any sludge, but I did hear the band in Preservation Hall.

    It was like the Disneyland ride "Pirates of the Carribean", only for real.

    I did glean some info on the gnarly aspects from "Down by Law", a movie by Jim Jaramouch. Charmingly gnarly. A disfunctional place for disfunctional people.

  172. Uh, how about the Spring Break cities? by JimmytheGeek · · Score: 1

    I have no use for Florida.

    The two I picked just happen to be the only cities where any part of them were built by people who cared what the outcome would look like.

    If you think the vast majority of Americans have a problem with drugs, uh, you aren't paying attention. They advertise drugs on t.v. Nothing more mainstream than that. The drugs are delivery systems for alcohol, but if you think there's a moral difference between it and the others, you are insane.

    I believe it is the especially blighted cities in Texas where you'll find drive through liquor stores. Is your definition of "not hidious" those cities that most prominantly feature big box retail outlets surrounded by wastelands of parking? Vast monoculture subdivisions of prefab, vinyl sided houses? That sums up most of the rest of the U.S. Santa Fe has some interesting bits, but it ain't adobe if you paint cement brown.

  173. I live there! It is a nice city... by JimmytheGeek · · Score: 1

    and Wallingford does have some distinction. There's not much left of Fremont, in my mind, anyway. I thought about including it in the list, but I think most of the beauty of Seattle was here before the buildings went up. Downtown has some cool buildings, too, but none of them give me anywhere near the "wow!" that the Victorian houses in S.F. give me - even the crack houses have paint jobs signed by the artiste! That said, Seattle is a lot more livable than S.F. or N.O., and it is quite pretty. I think Bellevue is downright ugly. Might as well be Columbus.

  174. STOP THE DMCA by tonyz2k · · Score: 1

    It seems like the DMCA is a card often played by large technology-oriented companies. Its time for Fat Wallet, and Slick Deals and the rest of them to fight for what they believe in. After all it is america and they need stick it to Best Buy and these other tools who insist on using the DMCA. I mean seriously this DMCA shit has got to stop, first kevin mitnick, then that kid from europe with his DVD CSS stuff, that russian kid for his adobe font stuff, whats next, are the Creators of Linux going to jail for using code from the Windows TCP/IP stack!? Wheres the DMCA Sux tshirt when you need it. Think Geek, make that and also a bumper sticker, I'll wear it down in DC and show the Senator Hatches whats what!

    --
    click here to incinerate homeless people
  175. Moderator on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That guy got "Flamebait" for correcting his own post.

  176. The horrible truth.. by Channard · · Score: 1
    She's had many visions that have come true and today she had one vision of horrifying clarity. She just called me about having seen a cataclysmic taking place next week. "Black silhuettes of mangled corpses, adults and children, flying in searing hot wind against a bleeding red sky pierced by a square tower made of four smaller towers with needles at the endpoints."

    Well, if she will blue-tac her Iron Maiden album covers to her walls..

  177. black friday by mikeb55121 · · Score: 1

    dude thats bs the best buy employees arent even allowed to see whats in the ad untill it is released to the general public. i know for a fact since i am a best buy employee and we only get to know a few of the major items that will be on sale that day.