Slashdot Mirror
Judge Denies TigerDirect's Request for Injunction
wallykeyster writes "As predicted in previous discussions the judge has ruled against TigerDirect's request for injunction to prevent Apple from using 'Tiger' in their advertising." I heard that both people who still held respect for TigerDirect no longer do.
Apple aren't, but you can buy a Mac running Linux from here. They're an authorised Apple OEM. There you go.
And tomorrow the stock exchange will be the human race
Note that aspirin mainly is not a trademark because Germany lost WWI. There was no way fo the Bayer company to protect their trademark against the Allies.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Yeah, there's so much in common with this Tiger case and what happened to kleenex. A made up word used as a brand name for a product becomes a common term sometimes used for all similar products. Sucks for Kleenex.
A company that has an already common word as part of their company name is upset because another company uses the same already common word as part of the name of one of their products. Oh God, the world is coming to an end! Between Tiger Direct, OS 10.4 Tiger, the approximately 6 bazillion sports teams named the Tigers, a dominate golfer named Tiger, oh and some stupid animal using the name too...I don't think I can function anymore, my brain is overloaded!
Besides. Apple announced their product as Tiger a long time ago. Then TigerDirect decides to make a big deal of it right before it's about to ship? The timing seems awfully suspect to me. Must be because I'm an Apple simpleton.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
You are only asked the last 4 digits of your social security number if you are applying to buy something under their extended payment plans. In which case they use another company to extend the credit out and it is needed for the approval process (just like any other loan application) to verify your credit rating and help them make a decision on whether or not to extend credit.
You will never be asked your SS number, or any part of your SS number if you are not applying to purchase on credit from them.
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
The point in this thread was that FOSS has had very little to do with the development of 10.4. Not that FOSS has had very little to do with OS X as a whole.
And while gcc and mach are significant, they are proportionally very small parts of OS X, and they could be replaced by something else. There are certainly other compilers out there than gcc - betters ones too - and there are certainly other kernels too. I mean, Apple could have potentially licensed the Solaris or BeOS kernels, maybe QNX, or whatever else. Hell, perhaps even WinCE or something. There *ARE* options. Some are better than others, of course. But to say that there would be no Apple without FOSS, and especially to suggest that 10.4 is largely developed by the open source community, well, that's just bull.
You're citing John Nugent? John Fucking Nugent? Delusional white-supremacist holocaust-revisionist John Fucking Nugent? America belongs to the whites because europeans were here before the indians John Fucking Nugent?
...", did you ever consider books?
Oh, and this is really your lucky day. You really hit the jackpot. One side of my family was exterminated in concentration camps, and you're citing a delusional holocaust-hoaxist.
For your sake I really hope you had no idea that you were reading and citing that sort of psycho. That libertyforum.org seems to be crawling with an appalling number of borderline neo-nazis. Not everyone there of course, but a very very ugly subgroup.
On the bright side I did get a chuckle out your link of when he explained that all of the UFO sightings since World War II were due to the magical futuristic stolen German inventions we never found out about. Not merely a holocaust denier, but a UFO conspiracy theorist to boot. That's just icing on the psycho-cake.
Oh and not to nitpick, but you should attend your English classes. I before E except after C would teach you that it's 'piece' not 'peice'.
Hmmm, lets review the "ei" words from my post. There was 'their' 'peice' and 'neither'. Ok, I botched 'peice'. However if your "English class" is the worthless I before E except after C you're going to be misspelling 'their' and 'neither'. I before E except after C except when pronounced as "A" and in neighbor and weigh, except science and species, except in pluralized 'cy' such as frequencies and vacancies, except in neither and either and eight and foreign and dreidel, and most of all in my daily caffeine. And on and on. But enough with the grammar Nazism, as if we didn't have enough Nazism with John Nugent already.
---
When you said, "Things like copyrights and patents
Well I dunno... "things like copyrights"... books... "things like copyrights"... books...
Hmmm. There might just be a connection there.
You believe in physical property rights but not intellectual property rights?
There are property rights.
There are copyrights.
There are patents.
There are trademarks.
Good and useful things. Only one of them is property rights.
The term "intellectual property" is a misnomer, and it is an extremely harmful misnomer. Copyrights are different than property rights and they are SUPPOSED to be different than property rights because information is different than property. When someone starts thinking or talking "intellectual property" they almost inevitably misunderstand what the law actually says, and they almost inevitable try to "fix" the law to become what they *thought* it was supposed to say.
Do you think that books also should not be copyrighted because they are just made up of words in different order?
As I said, copyrights can be a good and useful thing. However it is important to understand what the law actually says and what the law is actually supposed to be and what it is supposed to do.
To some people the following is going to sound like an attack on copyright. It's not. It is a defense of good old traditional copyright. It is merely an attack on a "backwards" view of copyright.
The Constitution grants congress the power to promote progress if they choose to do so. If congress did not choose to exercise this power then there would be no copyrights at all. The initial state is that the public has all rights to do whatever they please with information. To the extent information itself is "property" it is fundamentally public property.
If congress does choose to promote progress, the constitution grants a means of doing so. Congress may secure certain limited rights from the public and temporarily grant them exclusively to the author or inventor. A government granted limited monopoly. Th
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.