Slashdot Mirror


Lik-Sang Is Out Of Business

AKAImBatman writes "Thanks to Sony's heavy handed tactics, popular game importer Lik-Sang is closing its doors. All Lik-Sang customers are having their orders cancelled and refunded. Any attempt to place a new order redirects your web browser to the news of Lik-Sang's demise." From the announcement: "'Today is Sony Europe victory about PSP, tomorrow is Sony Europe's ongoing pressure about PlayStation 3. With this precedent set, next week could already be the stage for complaints from Sony America about the same thing, or from other console manufacturers about other consoles to other regions, or even from any publisher about any specific software title to any country they don't see fit. It's the beginning of the end... of the World as we know it', stated Pascal Clarysse, formerly known as the Marketing Manager of Lik-Sang.com. 'Blame it on Sony. That's the latest dark spot in their shameful track record as gaming industry leader. The Empire finally won, a few dominating retailers from the UK probably will rejoice the news, but everybody else in the gaming world lost something today.'" Many thanks to Sony for ruining it for the rest of us. I hope that your business model makes up for the customer goodwill you're lighting on fire today. Update: 10/24 21:34 GMT by Z : Eurogamer has Sony's response to Lik-Sang's accusations.

722 comments

  1. BOYCOTT SONY! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Informative
    To add to my submission, I think we should outright BOYCOTT Sony. As consumers, we've put up with rootkits, massive price increases, being treated like criminals when we're customers, faulty products, and just about every other mistreatment imaginable. Well, I think it's ENOUGH. I draw the line at shutting down a perfectly legal and useful business.

    If you're not already Boycotting Sony for their misdeeds, then I call upon you to stop purchasing ALL Sony products. Yes, that means no PSP, PS3, or PS2 stuff. (The PS2 and PSP games can be purchased used without majorly impacting a boycott, but it's better if anything Sony sits on the shelf.) More importantly, though, we have to hit Sony where it hurts! Which means no more Sony movies, music, and television.

    That means that we can't watch, purchase, or rent popular movies like:

    • James Bond: Casino Royale
    • Open Season
    • Monster House
    • Spiderman 3
    • Stranger Than Fiction
    • The Da Vinci Code
    • Zoom


    It also means that we need to stop watching popular television shows like:

    • The King of Queens
    • JEOPARDY!
    • Wheel of Fortune
    • Ripley's Believe It or Not!
    • Dragon Tales
    • The Boondocks


    Understandably, some of these are very entertaining pictures/shows that I (and I'm sure many others) would enjoy seeing. Unfortunately, a complete boycott means that every Sony product line must fail. So I ask you all, politely and humbly, will you boycott Sony? There is no excuse for their behavior, and I cannot in good conscience allow my dollars to support that behavior. If you feel the same way, then I would ask you to LOUDLY proclaim that you are joining the boycott.

    Thank you.

    P.S. If anyone has Sony contact info, please post it. A flood of angry but well-worded letters will help Sony pay attention to our displeasure.

    P.P.S. Read the Lik-Sang announcement for yourself! Apparently, Sony Europe's execs are big customers of Lik-Sang!

    /End Soapbox
    1. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Doesn't make a difference, I wasn't watching any of those, wasn't buying music and certainly won't get a PS3 anyway.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    2. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Graviteh · · Score: 0

      I agree. Sony has been treating us like crap. They have gone off the hook for far too long. I believe that the whole rootkit ordeal should have made Sony liable for something, but have you seen any lawsuits? I sure haven't. Corporations have too much power, but they depend on us, the people, for their success. We need to bring them to their knees. STOP BUYING THEIR PRODUCTS.

      --
      Dance Dance Revolution.
    3. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by _xeno_ · · Score: 5, Informative

      It also means you can't buy any music by "Weird Al" Yankovic. His label, Volcano, is a subsidiary of Sony BMG. I'm sad to say I didn't realize this until after I got "Straight Outta Lynwood" home and noticed that, below the sticker that read "this CD does not conform to CD Audio specifications and may not play in all CD players" there was a Sony BMG logo.

      So if you want to boycott Sony, you also have to boycott "Weird Al," something Slashdot may not enjoy doing.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    4. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Trashhalo · · Score: 1

      I cant watch open season!? Oh no what will I evar do. This boycott is going to be cake

      --
      Dooom
    5. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      The root kit CD's were enough for me to stop buying Sony products or contributing in any way to their bottom line. Not buying Sony products has become a matter of self-defense and monetary preservation.

      If you really wanted to make a dent, I would suggest writing the advertising SPONSORS of Sony related TV shows, like Jeopardy and The King of Queens and tell them you have discontinued buying their products until they quit sponsoring entertainment that Sony has ownership in. Nothing like the threat of lost revenue to get a sponsor to seek other channels for their commercials.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    6. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by HunterZ · · Score: 1

      Woot! I was already boycotting Sony and didn't even know it.

      --
      Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
    7. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Interesting
      As consumers, we've put up with rootkits, massive price increases, being treated like criminals when we're customers, faulty products, and just about every other mistreatment imaginable.


      Not to mention acting like criminals themselves by lying about the their exploding batteries. Most recently, they pulled batteries from their VAIO notebooks after trying to pin the blame on Dell, Toshiba, HP, etc. They had to admit that it was their own fault. Sorta. But then they said "Well, it could happen if the user bumps it." and "It could happen if the user misuses the laptop." What??? Aren't we talking about metal shavings being where they're not supposed to? What does that have to do with consumer use (or misuse) of the laptop?

    8. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Kamineko · · Score: 1
      Boycott, eh?


      I don't really have much choice... they kinda forced the only online shop I use to shut down.

    9. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Can i still pirate Sony's movies and music, or are we boycotting them there as well?

    10. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Done.

    11. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by El+Torico · · Score: 1

      Based on their bad judgement, I think it may be time to start selling or shorting their stock. That will get the Senior Management's attention.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    12. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by NickFortune · · Score: 1

      I can't boycott Sony over this! It'd mean I'd have to call off the boycott I imposed over the rootkit fiasco.

      Sony have gone out of their way, time and again, to show that they are no friend to their customer. Personally, I'm amazed that anyone is buying their stuff at all.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    13. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      Exactly- Sony can't be allowed to do something like this. I currently live in mainland China- if one importer goes down there are a hundred more to choose from. But, I am actually a US citizen. What happens when I go back to the US? If I don't stand up for a situation other people are facing right now, even if it doesn't currently affect me, it will, eventually. I'll have to go back to America one day, and then I'll have to ask friends and family to help me import stuff. Who knows- soon customs may start searching people for signs of importing stuff and force them to leave it behind. This has to be stopped before it gets out of hand.

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    14. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Same here. I looked at the parent comment's lists and didn't see anything I cared for.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    15. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      There's also Nintendo, you know. They're no angels, but have cleaned up their act.

    16. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Dan+East · · Score: 1

      That means that we can't watch, purchase, or rent popular movies like:

      What does watching have to do with purchasing or renting (or even buying tickets)?

      Dan East

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    17. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Grey+Ninja · · Score: 1

      Count me in. I am just one guy, but no more Sony for me. It was something that I was already semi-doing... but now it's on for real. No more Sony anything.

    18. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful
      So if you want to boycott Sony, you also have to boycott "Weird Al," something Slashdot may not enjoy doing.

      I think we all need to send a polite letter to Mr. Yankovic that we cannot purchase his music because of his distributor. With any luck, that will add a semi-important figure to the cause.
    19. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by twofidyKidd · · Score: 1

      I support a boycott of Sony. I own very little of their products to begin with, and I won't be buying any in the near or distant future. Enough is enough.

      --


      Hades, PoD: Official Advocate
    20. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Dexx · · Score: 1

      I'm in. Just as I was gonna buy the new Wierd Al album too..

      --
      Feel the fear and do it anyway.
    21. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by PriceIke · · Score: 1

      I quit buying Sony after last year's rootkit fiasco too. And coincidentally, a Sony product that my office purchased a few years ago suddenly failed this morning in a VERY embarrassing way. I have already sworn off Sony music AND consumer electronics equipment .. now I'm going to have to start paying attention to what movies they're distributing ..

      Fortunately almost all the music I buy, I can buy straight from the artist. Pity about John Mayer, though.

      --
      It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
    22. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sometimes I think it just would make more sense to pirate Al's music, then just mail him a check. Let him take care of distributing it.

    23. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by RingDev · · Score: 1

      I can't say that Sony has no hand in his distribution, but they've only been his label for a handful of tunes. If all they do is distribute his CD's to stores, you should be able to purchase a copy direct from his site or through iTunes with out putting a penny in Sony's hand.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    24. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offense, but do you think a call-to-arms on Slashdot is going to even put a dent Sony's plans, what with being a multi-media conglomerate and all? The most you're going to manage to get out of it is...well, +5 informative I guess. Congratulations.

      Besides, there's no need to boycott Sony. To abuse two popular phrases, once they've shot themselves in the foot so many times, they won't have a leg to stand on. Keep in mind, they've just reduced their own predicted budget by over 60 billion dollars. Give it time, maybe let them seal a merger with SCO if they're desperate for an exit strategy.

    25. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Dare+nMc · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It also means you can't buy any music by "Weird Al" Yankovic.


      Does that also mean no Apple, Dell, HP, or Toshiba Laptops which use sony manufactured batteries?

    26. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have first hand experience of another thing Sony did that was underhand.

      They published a CD that had a copy protection on it (Key2AudioXS) didn't make any mention of this on the case and then had the audacity to say I was wrong and I was basically making it all up. Sooner they go bankrupt or get some intelligent people in at the helm, the better.

    27. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, am with bullish moron's boycott. Down with corporations and service providers, down!

    28. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Will this include Sony Ericsson phones, and Sony Cybershot cameras?(I have to sell these) And here's a frightening sony sales rep quote:

      "The reason sony uses Memory Sticks for their phones is because they will work on your computer, your ps2/3, your psp, your stereo, your tv, your mp3 players, all of that!"

      *note: sony has a flagship product for everyone of those household items mentioned.

      However, thats the only power sony has over the phones, which is the name and the memory stick. AFAIK, Ericsson does most of the design and production. The Cameras are another matter.

    29. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, here's a few to get started.

      HRadmin@scee.net
      ps2_tools@playstation.sony.com
      scee_tm@psp.scedev.net
      scee_tm@ps2-pro.com
      devrel-scea@playstation.sony.com
      scee_presscentre@scee.net
      wim@abcommunication.be
      maryse_fitzpatrick@scee.net
      tschembri@forestals.com
      neil.dsylva@ap.sony.com
      games@lindenbarbosa.nl
      ethyl@sterkinekor.com
      brigitte_moor@scee.net
      PlayStation_Support@scee.net
      Service@at.playstation.com
      customer.service@be.scee.com
      Sony.Hrvatska@eu.sony.com
      sharon_g@spidernet.com.cy
      support@dk.playstation.com
      fi-hotline@nordiskfilm.com
      playstation@fr.playstation.com
      psp@fr.playstation.com
      Service@de.playstation.com
      vilbergur@skifan.is
      support@ie.playstation.com
      taliv@isfar.co.il
      assistenza@playstation.it
      customer.service@be.scee.com
      mschranz@forestals.com
      customer.service@nl.scee.com
      customer.service@nz.scee.com
      support@no.playstation.com
      Dariusz.Slomka@eu.sony.com
      playstationpt@stockuno.net
      Cristian.Pascu@eu.sony.com
      cic@sony.ru
      Jaroslav.Lesko@eu.sony.com
      Sony.Slovenija@eu.sony.com
      veneshias@sterkinekor.com
      Spain_InfoScee@scee.net
      support@se.playstation.com
      Service@ch.playstation.com
      renseignements@ch.playstation.com
      informazioni@ch.playstation.com
      pinar.ataylan@eu.sony.com
      Moises.Dacuycuy@ap.sony.com
      help@uk.playstation.com
      Oleg.Kiselev@eu.sony.com
      Dmitri.Bordovski@eu.sony.com
      WebSiteTech@sonypictures.com
      consumer@SPHECustomerSupport.sony.com
      Locationfreesupport@am.sony.com

    30. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by r_naked · · Score: 1

      I am in the market for a new HDTV. Even with all Sony's previous bad acts, I was still going to get an XBR2. Out of all the rear projection DLP based TVs, ths XBR2 really stood out so I was willing to let my consious ignore what Sony has been up to.

      Enough is enough though. I had made up my mind the minute I read this submission, even before seeing your post to call for a boycott. Believe me, I think it will piss enough people off that this will hurt Sony.

      It is one thing to screw up with root kits (why they are called root kits is beyond me, they didn't allow anyone access to the Winodows machine, they just used "root kit" practices for installation), it is quite another to put a company out of business.

      --
      -- http://anonet.org -- The internet the way it was meant to be. Check it out, you may be surprised.
    31. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by xtracto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah yeah, exactly the same Sony that I started boycotting when the rootkit fiasco was unveiled, I followed that quite close and even made a list of the affected discs.
      Unfortunately I had just bought some sony brand earplugs (I like them because they are in-ear but not as expensive as the shure E3c [or something like that]). After some time I had to buy replacement for the replaceable buds but sony wanted to rape me with £10 for I believe 2 pairs.

      I held my boycott and bought some from a chinnese guy on Ebay, just for £5 for something like 6 pairs black and white :).

      I just bought a DVD player, and I chose a Phillips (I believe Sony electronics are pretty overpriced, not as Bose of course but they are still overpriced).

      I have explained my girlfriend about Sony practices and at least she will think again before buying Sony (although she still wants that iPod... even if there are other better mp3 players I have not been able to convince her).

      I dont buy movies, I rent them via lovefilm and I seldom go to the cinemas, just when some nice "independent" film is screened.

      I will buy a Wii, because mmm because I am not attracted to the othe 2 systems. Oh, and for all of you who believe that the PS3 will be incrdible expensive, just the other time I was showing my girlfriend the differences in prices (in the wikipedia), the price of the ps3 for Mexico is: MXN$7,999 ($640 US) MXN$9,499 ($760 US). Can you believe that shit? $760 US. I think that the market in Mexico for it is what, 2 persons? (well, lets say Fox children and the new president children). Of course you still have to buy the $99 US for the games... that is INSANE.

      Yeah, I agree with the Sonny boycott. I hope more and more people realize that corporations are consuming their rights and start fighting the only way they can to stop them (no, political movements and any other kind of government related tactics wont work as corporations already spoon feed politicians, no I am not paranoid enough, I am from and lived in a country where corrupt government is blatant and the rich are the ones that control the goverment with the Mordida).

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    32. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I don't think that's the point, though. It illustrates a problem that no one posting here has yet resolved; how do you make people want to boycott a company that has so many hands in so many different parts of the entertainment industry (to the point that it's hard to tell where their influence ends, as evidenced by this thread)?

    33. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by h2odragon · · Score: 1

      I'd like to throw the bad CCD issue in for consideration. I finally got an honest refund for my dead camera, after ~6hr on the phone to sony, being told i would have to pay for a repair twice; and finally being told a repair was impossible after a couple month's delay. Yeah, they could've handled it worse, but they damn sure could've handled it better, too.

      Sony has always been an industry pioneer. they're just currently the market leader in slime, evil, greed, and lame.

    34. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by pen · · Score: 1

      This is why I use the RIAA Radar

    35. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

      Thanks to their recent recalls, they may not have Sony-made batteries in the near future.

      If you want to add to the boycott, perhaps a letter writing campaign to these companies in an attempt to reduce the business they do with Sony may help as well.
      =Smidge=

    36. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Wm_K · · Score: 1

      I already did boycott them. Since the rootkit debacle I haven't considered buying a Sony product anymore and some actions from Sony after it only confirmed my stance. Actually I find it pretty easy. Sony used to make innovative electronics, nowadays it's just busy being engaged in conservative business politics. Real innovation comes from other companies nowadays. Nintendo and Samsung for example. So I'm not really interested in Sony products anymore anyway.

    37. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by SoCalChris · · Score: 1
      And coincidentally, a Sony product that my office purchased a few years ago suddenly failed this morning in a VERY embarrassing way.
      Ok, you can't make a statement like that and not tell us what the embarrassing failure was. It's against Slashdot's TOS, or something.
    38. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by keyne9 · · Score: 1

      I'll boycott Sony.. just as soon as Final Crackstacy XII ships.

    39. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by c0d3h4x0r · · Score: 1

      If you're not already Boycotting Sony for their misdeeds, then I call upon you to stop purchasing ALL Sony products.

      Boycotts are ineffective against large companies like Sony because they make and do so much stuff that it's impossible to avoid all of it. In addition, boycotts are ineffective in general, because typically only a minority of a company's customers are even upset about an issue in the first place, and they calm down and lose interest in the boycott quickly.

      If you really want to stick it to Sony, buy some of their stock. That entitles you to be a voting shareholder. Each share you own counts as one vote. Not only can you vote, but most companies allow shareholder to propose initiatives to go on the ballot at the annual shareholders meeting.

      If you really want to organize something that will make a real difference, set up a non-profit organization (and a web site to go with it) to collect "donations" from people. Have the non-profit use the donations to buy up tons of Sony stock and use the shareholder power to propose and vote on initiatives to change Sony's unethical behavior. Since the organization is a non-profit, it can't just take profits from the stock if the stock happens to go up (which guarantees donors that the organization's motivations won't be tainted). The organization could even spell out a legal agreement to contributors that when they donate, their donations will be used to purchase shares that the organization will never sell, and that if the organization dissolves, the ownership of the shares will revert back to the donor.

      --
      Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
    40. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by dsraistlin · · Score: 1

      The pattern for their email, for sony USA anyway, seems to be:
      [first name]_[lastname]@sonyusa.com

      So if you know who to contact by looking at names in a news article or off other their website there you go.

    41. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Yeah good luck with that.

    42. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by just_another_sean · · Score: 1

      But, but, Jeopardy! Jeaopardy man!

      [sean_connery]Surprise Me, Trebek![/sean_connery]

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    43. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If thats the case, and your boycotting sony, then you can't watch play or even record anything with DVD on it, sony owns all the rights to DVD's, even if you buy dvd player made from phillips sony gets a % of that, so i hope your not watching those porns again....

    44. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by dsraistlin · · Score: 1

      Sony Europe seems to be the following:
      [first name].[last name]@eu.sony.com

    45. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're losing money on every PS3 right? Buy them all up, but DON'T buy any games. That'll hurt them!

    46. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My requirements: cheapest stereo receiver with digital input available at tweeter.
      Cheapest: $200 sony
      Second cheapest: $300 denon

      However, the sony was disqualified on the basis of being made by sony.
      So I went with the denon.

      For me, it has begun. Thankfully its getting easier every year to let go of final fantasy, and guitar hero 2 will be available for xbox360.

      p.s. I dont even have a 360. I would rather buy a 360 than give another dime t osony.

    47. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by MonkeyBoy · · Score: 1

      Eh? I thought Slashdot didn't like any label that futzed with the CD spec for copy protection?

      I mean hell, I barely buy music, and even I know enough not to buy CDs with that sticker on them.

      Maybe you should shoot Weird Al a note about that too while you're at it.

      --

      Moof!

    48. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Most publishing contracts are exclusive.

    49. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      How exactly does ownership of television shows go? One would think that PBS would own Dragon Tales with Sony (via Columbia Pictures) being the contractor that subcontracted it out to foreign firms to actually make. If not, it's an utter waste of public money to subsidize something that isn't even publicly owned and controlled afterwards (assuming PBS is in fact a state enterprise - not sure how the semantics work out).

      Either way, thanks for pointing that out. I maintain an active boycott (and badmouthing campaign) of things Sony and Dragon Tales had slipped through the cracks, having attributed PBS as the controlling entity and not seeing Sony as being involved in that business. Should have been obvious considering that Sony subsidiaries published the DVD version and CD spinoffs (which I naturally didn't buy).

    50. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by antime · · Score: 1

      You better boycott Nintendo and Microsoft as well, as they were all part of killing the "old" Lik-Sang in 2002. (A legally separate, but strangely similar company took over the name and resumed business later, no doubt the same will happen now.)

    51. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by jridley · · Score: 1

      I have not been a huge Sony fan for a while (I don't like proprietary hardware), but I still buy things from them occasionally.
      That's over. This is the final straw. I was actually kind of thinking of getting a PS3 (we've never owned any gaming console at our house at all) but screw that. I've bought several things from Lik-Sang and I'm sorry to hear of this. The reason Sony is giving is obviously laughable; they've probably been after them for a while for selling mod chips or something and this was an excuse.

    52. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      I'm in. I will now delete my Tivo season pass and saved episodes of Robot Chicken, a Sony TV program. And that's going to hurt because I like that show.

      I use Sony MDR-71 headphones with my non-Sony DAP. It was nearly time to order my third consecutive pair of the things -as with any Sony product, they wear out and have to be replaced every so often. But this time I will order Shure or Etymotics instead.

      I have a spool of Sony CD-Rs. Haven't decided if they should go into a microwave or just be donated to a church or something.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    53. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      They also make the CCDs that go in a number of other cameras, including market leaders Nikon and Canon.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    54. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      IF you want to support the artist, then download all the songs off the net and then send your $15.00 to Al himself with a letter explaining that You love his music, want to pay for it but refuse to let sony or the record companies have a dime of it.

      It's not legal, but get's a point across in a BIG way to the artists. If more of them were to recieve letters like this from fans paying for the music but not getting it on CD somebody would wake up.

      Unfortunately, america says BAAAAAAA! and does what they are told by their corperate masters... so this will never happen.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    55. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by tralfamador · · Score: 1

      fuck that, guitar hero 2 comes out in 2 weeks.

      keep raging against the machine, fatboy.

    56. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by High+Hat · · Score: 1
      I recently lost the removable front plate of my Sony car stereo.

      The dealer told me a replacement was 120 EUR, while the stereo was 150 EUR 2 years ago.

      This, combined with the other crap Sony has been pulling recently means I'm getting a JVC now and I won't recommend Sony products to anybody anymore.

    57. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Don't forget Sony's lithium ion computer batteries, now sold, at the suggestion of another Slashdot poster a few weeks back, under Sony's XPlod line.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    58. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who says I can't watch Casino Royale?

      I'll just purchase it... from the internet store... :)

    59. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      I took it more as a challenge.

      As it turned out, the disc worked perfectly in my car CD player, which can also play MP3s burned on CDR, and ripped perfectly via CD-Ex. (Although I disabled AutoRun via TweakUI prior to inserting the disc - I'm not stupid.)

      So whatever copy protection scheme they used on that disc doesn't appear to have worked that well.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    60. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by fistfullast33l · · Score: 1

      You're right! Weird Al will immediately sit up and rip up his contract with Sony! What a smart move! It's not like he's legally bound to that paper once he tears it up! And Sony never sues anyone! Good idea!

      Get a grip and stop grasping for straws. Average consumers can't even spell Lik Sang let alone know what it is. It's a tragedy they closed but you need to attack the legislators not the corporations. Corporations have too much power. Elect good legislators, reform campaign finance laws, and lobby for a legislative agenda that weakens intellectual property protection. Or just move to Canada.

    61. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

      I've been boycotting Sony for years. It's pretty easy. Every time I start to lose interest, or find something that makes me think "well, maybe it's been long enough", they do something to renew my dislike of them. I refuse to type in all-caps, though. Maybe small caps...

    62. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      Boycotting means avoiding. That means don't acquire the target stuff, regardless of how you get it. The effect of a successful boycott goes well beyond the immediate effect of a few lost sales (if lost sales from the people actually boycotting were the only effect, they would be quite weak indeed).

    63. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by jetxee · · Score: 1

      You forgot Sony Ericsson. Let's boycott it too!

    64. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should we also boycott the XBox while we are at it?

    65. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      1. He doesn't need to rip up his contract to have influence (no matter how small) over his distributor. The only difference between him and us is that he's in the public eye. If he notices a significant drop in sales due to Sony's misdeeds, then you can expect that he's going to take whatever action he possibly can.

      2. This is due to Sony Europe's actions in European countries. Moving from the US to Canada won't help much, nor will swapping out my legislators. In fact, Sony is exploiting the looseness of the EU relationships to crush Lik-Sang by filing suits in multiple countries. In the US, they'd all be consolidated and transferred to a single court.

      Capesh?

    66. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      It's not going to work. You'll never get a controlling interest (often it's mathematically impossible), and in the meantime, stock purchases just drive the stock price higher.

    67. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Merusdraconis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And besides, if the PS3 crashes and burns it'll hit the only profitable part of Sony where it hurts. Sony will have to offload most of its entertainment content to stay afloat, so all you need to do is boycott the PS3. That's not so hard to do because it costs $600.

    68. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by steveo777 · · Score: 1

      Make a copy, send Al a check for $5 each copy you make. It's a LOT more than he see's per sale.

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
    69. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by jetxee · · Score: 1
      BTW, I am already boycotting Sony since the rootkit story on /.

      I have to tell that my life without rootkits and Spiderman movies has greately improved. SonyEricsson was the hardest to boycott. I had to become a Nokia fan^H^H^Hcustomer instead :)

    70. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by tepples · · Score: 1

      Are most publishing contracts exclusive for the entire set of works by a given author?

    71. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by harl · · Score: 1

      The PS2 and PSP games can be purchased used without majorly impacting a boycott, but it's better if anything Sony sits on the shelf.

      This is completely untrue. If console makers sell the consoles at a loss then how are they making money? Why would they bother? Sony gets paid for every game that sells. That's where they make the real money.

      Do you remember Activision? Atari tried to prevent them from selling their games since they weren't paying Atari. That's why their cartriges had a different shape. They weren't official.

      Moderm copy protection on consoles is only half there to prevent people from using pirate copies of games. The other reason is to prevent anyone from making a game and not paying Sony.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    72. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My apologies to Weird Al Yankovic, but it doesn't matter who distributed his album; I wouldn't buy a so-called "CD" which breaks the CD standards and reduces my freedom to make use of a product I legitimately purchased.

    73. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Montag2k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Huh. And what about the producers that recorded his music? The audio engineers that probably make a heck of a lot less money than he does? Do you think he'll take your $15.00 and divvy it up among the people that helped him make the album? I don't feel great about the situation in the music industry - I absolutely hate it. However, sending the money is just a way to not feel guilty about violating copyright. If you're serious about an actual boycott, don't buy the music. Don't consume the music. Find something else to listen to. Or, on second thought - you could also buy it used. Or purchase a rarity - a lot of artists make small promo records for labels other than their main one. I have no idea whether Weird Al has ever done anything like that though.

      Cheers,
      Montag
    74. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by chaoticgeek · · Score: 1

      I'll do it, I'm not intrested in much of that anyways. Only thing on that list was the new James Bond, but I can get over it. As long as I can still watch Scrubs I'm good.

      --
      hello
    75. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And what about the producers that recorded his music? The audio engineers that probably make a heck of a lot less money than he does? Do you think he'll take your $15.00 and divvy it up among the people that helped him make the album?


      I am not sure of the producers (although in this case they are probably label flacks) but generally the audio engineer is paid for his time at the time of recording, he does not receive royalties. Sure - he gets paid less than Weird Al, but there is always a disparity in the pay between tech and talent in the entertainment industry.
      --

      Enigma

    76. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      This isn't hard for me to do. I haven't bought any hardware made by Sony for at least 10 years, I think. I believe I still have a Sony Walkman in a drawer somewhere (the kind that plays cassettes--remember those?). And I believe my alarm clock says Sony, but I've had that for ages too.

      Does Sony even make anything worth buying any more? Their TVs look nice, but they're not that nice when competing TVs cost far less. Everything else they make is utterly forgettable, usually very overpriced, and wrapped up in proprietary crap like the "Memory Stick".

      The only place where this will be a problem is probably in media, since Sony has a hand in a lot of music and movies. I don't buy music any more, except for an occasional used CD, but I have to admit that when I put movies on my queue on Netflix, I don't look too closely at what studio made it.

    77. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by LordVader717 · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, but they are very comprehensive, often with a significant timeframe, in which the author remains exclusive.

      But more importantly, it means that Weir Al can't just decide to sell his songs over the internet, because that would be against the contract he signed with the publisher, whether that's Sony, or any other.

    78. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by burnetd · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think you need to read that again...

      "The PS2 and PSP games can be purchased ***used*** without..."

      Buy them Second Hand. Sony does not make a penny that way.

    79. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 1
      Although I disabled AutoRun via TweakUI prior to inserting the disc - I'm not stupid.
      Autorun is stupid. I have a list of things I do straight away whenever I take control of a computer, and permanently disabling Autorun is one of them, because I got sick of stuff starting up right when I would insert the disc. Avoiding the Sony rootkit installs is an added bonus.
      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    80. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by nschubach · · Score: 1

      I think I'm going to boycott this boycott. I'll add a few Sony titles to the Christmas list this year, wait for a PS3, and whatever else it takes.

      WTF do I care about Lik-Sang for? I never bought anything from them, nor cared to.

      How many Audio CDs have I stuck in my computer the past 10 years... none. They have other homes. Stereo Rack/Car. Do I agree with rootkits? Not really. But I don't cry about it.

      Have I had a battery explode all over me burning my balls to a crisp? Nope.

      Has my PS2 ever broke down? No, the thing just goes. It's awesome.

      Seriously, given Sony has had some rough calls the past few years, does it call for an all out assault? Is this the same fervent attitude you had (still have) against Microsoft for their shady ways? How's that working out for you?

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    81. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Inda · · Score: 1

      I'm going to go one step further and pirate all these. Take that Sony!

      Sorry Slashdot swarm...

      I mean I'm going to infringe Sony's copyrights! Take that Sony! ...but I wouldn't have bought them anyway because I spend my money on flowers and plants. So I'm probably not hurting Sony at all. Um... Take that Sony!

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    82. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by curecollector · · Score: 1

      I think we all need to send a polite letter to Mr. Yankovic that we cannot purchase his music because of his distributor. With any luck, that will add a semi-important figure to the cause.

      You'd better hurry before he's too busy playing his PS3.

    83. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Asrynachs · · Score: 1

      I love Sony!! a truck carrying a bunch of Sony DVD players ran me over and the driver got out and shot me in the leg just to make sure I was hurt, then he rubbed sewage in the wound and threw me into a ravine and left me for dead. P.S. I'm boycotting reading your posts

    84. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Kirgin · · Score: 1

      I've already joined the fight against Sony...I haven't in the past or plan to in the future pay for Sony titles.

      I wish I could say it was for noble reasons.

    85. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Proz512 · · Score: 1

      I won't boycott but I just won't buy anything new from them. Used games/movies, the bane of their existence. This will ensure that Sony doesn't receive any money directly from me.

    86. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by mei_mei_mei · · Score: 1

      Send him a cheque for a dollar. It's probably more than Sony would give him fro a CD sale.

    87. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by DrXym · · Score: 1
      To add to my submission, I think we should outright BOYCOTT Sony.

      I can think of things about Sony that should be boycotted - DRM music for example. But them forcing a grey importer to stop fucking with their business should not be one of them. Nintendo and Microsoft would do no different. All console makers have gone after modchippers, grey importers and the like, Lik-Sang is just one of them.

      Whether you love or hate Sony, the simple fact is that you need the producer's permission before grey importing items into Europe for distribution. Lik-Sang didn't have it. They know they didn't have it. They steamed on regardless. In fact they must have known that Sony were vehemently going to stop the practice. But perhaps they hoped to last long enough to coin it in from the PS3. With that bubble burst, better to take the money and run.

      That's too bad for Lik-Sang, but it seems like a rather dubious proposition for them to have built a house on sand in the first place. I have to say that I've used them in the past and they were a speed and efficient service, but if their main capital is made from selling modchips or imported consoles... well they only have themselves to blame.

    88. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I draw the line at shutting down a perfectly legal and useful business.

      Lik-sang had a contract with Sony specifying how they could sell Sony products. They broke that contract. They got sued for it. They knew DAMN well what they were doing, and did it anyway. Don't demonize Sony for Lik-sang breaking their contract. (there are many other reasons to demonize them)

    89. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      she will think again before buying Sony (although she still wants that iPod)

      If you really want to hurt Sony, one of the better things you could do would be to buy an Apple iPod. Apple and Sony play nice, but they are bitter rivals.

    90. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Mordaximus · · Score: 1
      To add to my submission, I think we should outright BOYCOTT Sony. As consumers, we've put up with rootkits, massive price increases, being treated like criminals when we're customers, faulty products, and just about every other mistreatment imaginable. Well, I think it's ENOUGH. I draw the line at shutting down a perfectly legal and useful business.

      No one anywhere, ever said you had to buy their products in the first place? They'll charge what the market will pay, so you can't complain about price increases. Rootkit notwithstanding, other companies that have their feet in media have also been guilty of the other sins you list.

      A complete boycott? That means boycotting any product with Sony parts in it. You also ready to do that? How many monitors have Sony tubes? How many PCs have Sony CDs/DVDs. How many cameras use Sony CCDs? You going to prepare a list so everyone knows which products they can actually buy? You really willing to hurt other business just to take a stab at Sony?

    91. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by zorg50 · · Score: 1

      Or you could just buy used consoles and games. You don't have to give up anything except the newest titles.

    92. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, america says BAAAAAAA! and does what they are told by their corperate masters... so this will never happen.

      This attitude is fun. It's a good marker of a 14 year old (possibly not physically, but definitely emotionally) and it's an easy way to know who to avoid reading in the future.

      Thanks for branding yourself as a jackass and saving me the 10 minutes it would have taken to discern it myself!

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    93. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Montag2k · · Score: 1
      generally the audio engineer is paid for his time at the time of recording, he does not receive royalties

      Good point. However, that audio engineer is still being paid by the record company that gets part of the $15 spent on the CD, whether it is called a "royalty" or not. In other words, *someone* has to buy a CD in order for them to get paid. Now, does that mean that the record companies should make an obscene profit from the music? Nope.

      Montag
    94. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      And it'll allow them to say to publishers "look how many PS3s we've sold, you should make a game for us!".

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    95. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by WWWWolf · · Score: 1
      Does that also mean no Apple, Dell, HP, or Toshiba Laptops which use sony manufactured batteries?

      "So how are the sales?"
      "Well, PS3 sales are pretty much dead, no one buys our other widgets... um..."
      "*sigh* Okay, do we have anything that still sells? Batteries?"
      "Oh, those still sell, I suppose."
      "Great. We used to dominate the console world. Now we sell batteries. Oh well..."
      "Except that the laptop batteries are blowing up and no one wants them. But we still have good market hold on the rechargeable AA battery market!"
      "Great! We're beaten, we're modest, but one day, one day, we shall get our vengeance!"

    96. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by jskline · · Score: 1

      Frankly;

      This is really difficult since Sony has their hands into so many venues that it would be hard to count them all. I can remember back when Sony was the Cadillac of anything electronic. I was a full time licensed servicer for all of their product lines from consumer through broadcast and industrial.

      The combinations of the root kit debacle, all those cheap crappy quality batteries, and now this issue now make me think there is much more of a problem with Sony's management. They have to compete just like everyone else but it does make you wonder what management is thinking. I do know there is a big problem with influence coming from the RIAA and the MPAA who are behind much of the DCMA garbage. Remember lawyers smell money. They smell money even when its in the vicinity.

      From what I read about this retailer, I could not find anything wrong that he was doing. So the lawyers ganged up on him in a distinct attempt to run him out and lock control of the product back in Sony's hands. This smells like Sony once again attempting to lock their product such that they can maintain all controls over it... probably even price. Who's to say that the lawyers didn't influence Sony into this thinking and ultimately this litigation?!

      Boy do I smell a rat.

      However, I still have all my legacy Sony electronics for which I will NOT get rid of but will still look back on with fondness. Even my original Sony walkman TPS-L2 which still is working perfectly since the day I bought it brand new from Sony Sound Center in downtown Minneapolis Minnesota back about August 1978! I have a whole lot of Sony product at home that I see no reason to get rid of even for such an emotional issue as this. At one time, Sony was the best. Plain and simple. They used to put out the most innovative, ahead-of-its-time products you could imagine. I don't know what happened to Sony's former self, but I would like to see it come back.

      I still do like some of those shows and movies, and it does not really empart any point to Sony to hurt those markets. They are not of the same problem. I would recommend specifically targeting the game and related products since this is what Sony's lawyers are doing. If the sales of the product plummet, then they will probably try to pin it to something else, but eventually people talk, and it will get back to them about the crappy marketing attitudes and tactics going on. If they try the same tactics on other products or venues, then the same resultant boycott can ensue. A total boycott, if truely effective, could shut down the company for good and then this hurts much more than the consumer. Think of this too; If theres a game you absolutely want but is only available on the PSP, then wait. It will ultimately be noticed and someone will begin to make versions for other consoles. It is after all; just a game.

      Just my humble opinion.

      Cheers

      --
      All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
    97. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by synonymous · · Score: 1

      I have some time ago stopped buying phony sony. After dozens of car CD, home CD, and portable player CD, $600 TV, Receivers, damn near everything up in smoke that I ever bought from them. Meanwhile, dads old Pioneer equip still going strong. So yeah, there are other things to buy. Same goes for radio shmuck (shack). One time I bought a car phone charger that just sat in the car and hadnt been used for like 6 months or so, and but like twice. On the third time it fried. I took it and the receipt in to see what could be done and she looked at me like I was stupid for not reading that the warrantee was good for but some 90 days and said there was nothing she was going to do. So that I guess is radio shacks way of saying "If you want to be ripped off, shop here". Havent been back in years.

    98. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by harl · · Score: 1

      My bad. Apparently reading is hard.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
    99. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Now wait, this is just BS.

      Sony said "please stop selling our console" and Lik-Sang said "GO F*&K YOURSELF!"

      So Sony said "Ok Lik-Sang, we're going to have to sue you"

      Lik-Sang says "Oh no! You big meanies! We'll just close our doors so everyone will hate you Sony. Then we'll run to our bedrooms and cry in our pillows. WAAAAA!"

      Give me a break! Lik-Sang sells hundreds of products, they don't need to close their doors just because they can't sell PS3s or PSPs. This is utter BS and Lik-Sang should be ashamed of themselves. All Sony wants them to do is stop selling PS3s and PSPs to customers that shouldn't be getting them, it's not that hard to do! Everyone else plays by the rules, why does Lik-Sang think they're so damned special that they can spit in Sony's eye and when Sony smacks them they go running to their room to cry instead of just saying "You know what, you're right, we're sorry and we'll stop."

      Way to go Lik-Sang, way to behave like a spoiled brat instead of a grown-up. Glad you're leaving so a grown-up can take your place.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    100. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "I think we all need to send a polite letter to Mr. Yankovic that we cannot purchase his music because of his distributor. With any luck, that will add a semi-important figure to the cause."

      At the very least, it'd let Sony know (albeit indirectly) why their sales went down. If there was a massive boycott of Sony products and they had no idea WHY it happened, they'd blame piracy. Honestly, I'm a little worried about a broad boycott. How would they know it's actually a boycott and not a shift in the economy or some bs?

      I think the message is more important than the actual loss in sales. It'd be interesting if a bunch of Weird Al CDs were mailed back to Sony with a note saying "This is the last product of yours we're buiying." Imagine people running around saying "Argh, why are we getting all these Weird Al CD's back?"

      Although, after typing this, I hate the idea of making Al a sore-spot with the company. It's not HIS fault...

      Blah. I don't have a perfect solution. Sorry.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    101. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by MtlDty · · Score: 1

      You can add my name to that list. Maybe someone at Sony will notice the number of hostile replies on internet sites such as this and take note.

    102. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Except that most of his work has NOT been published by Sony. It may have been distributed by sony, but his discograph barily mentions Sony.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    103. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      I'll boycott Sony when someone else makes a game console that will take advantage of my 61" 1080p set.

    104. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by funkdancer · · Score: 1

      I just replied in the other Weird Al thread how I was going to make my first CD purchase in ages. Learning that the CD potentially comes with malware (can anyone please confirm if it is copy protected), your suggestion makes excellent sense.
      Hope he takes paypal... :)

      --
      ISO certified == THX certified
    105. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i have to give up spiderman 3?

      *looks up at the heavens*
      noooooooooooooooooo!

    106. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by metamatic · · Score: 1
      Unfortunately I had just bought some sony brand earplugs (I like them because they are in-ear but not as expensive as the shure E3c [or something like that]).

      Sennheiser, my friend. Sennheiser.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    107. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by meme_police · · Score: 1

      I'm with you. I have been avoiding Sony products ever since the rootkit debacle, unfortunately I haven't gained any traction here at work where we just inked a deal to go with Sony cameras rather than Panasonic.

      --

      The meme police, They live inside of my head

    108. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by jnguy · · Score: 1

      Actually, everyone should go out and buy PS3s. Just don't buy any games.

    109. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Technician · · Score: 1

      noticed that, below the sticker that read "this CD does not conform to CD Audio specifications and may not play in all CD players" there was a Sony BMG logo.

      SONY or not, I boycott non-CD's. As much as I like Wierd AL, the DRM is boycotted on this one. SONY is just a bonus reason to not buy it.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    110. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Great, but what is the connection between Sony and the Ipod?

    111. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Send him a cheque for a dollar. It's probably more than Sony would give him fro a CD sale.

      Mod it insightful. He most likely gets between 8% and 14% of the sales, which means that if his CD is sold for about $14 he gets between about $1.10 and $1.95.

      I used to think that artists were getting ripped off (my parents are published writters) but I quickly found out that they could estimate themselves happy when they did get any money at all and in time (there easily can be a couple of years between a sale and the time the artist gets his share of the money, at least when it comes to books).

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    112. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by mei_mei_mei · · Score: 1

      Performers/writers actually get only a surprisingly small percentage from sales. It's true of CDs and it's true of downloads.

      Taking iTunes as an example, and using figures from this article (it's from theregister and it realtes to the UK iTunes store in October 2005, but the figures are still approximately correct now and in other territories):
      "...the 4.5p performers make out of every 79p iTunes download. That figure, which translates into a rate of six per cent..."

      "...Separately, the Mechanical Copyright Protection Society (MCPS) and the Performing Rights Society (PRS) both want to up the writer's royalty to 12 per cent from today's 8.5 per cent rate..."

      There are two lots of money because there are two copyrights involved in any song sale, belonging to the performer and the person who wrote the song - they may very well be the same person so let's assume they are. Then for each track downloaded the artist gets roughly 11 pence (4.5p + 8.5% of 79p), which is roughly 21 cents.

      Now what I'd like to see is a service based in Russia or somewhere, charging say 49 cents per song (as opposed to 99cents on iTunes) and giving 42 cents of that to the artist, completely cutting out the record label. How could the RIAA etc. argue for any sort of moral high ground when the 'illegal' service was actually paying twice as much to artists as the legal one? That'd be one fun skirmish for the moral high ground.

    113. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      But that's not the point. Any other publisher he signed the rights to will have exclusive publishing rights, whether they're Sony or not.

    114. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nice try little boy :-) did your daddy teach you to troll? because you are not good at it in any way.

      and by looking at your UID, you must be around 6 years old? oh wait, that was your maturity level in your post that gave that away.

      have a happy day mister wanna-be.

    115. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Who cares? The argument at hand was to boycott Sony because they distribute his music. But they don't publish it. I don't care if www.Goats.ex has exclusive publishing rights to his music, boycotting it will not effect Sony.

      Boycotting Weird Al to hurt Sony would be like boycotting Apple to hurt Fedex.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    116. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by eddiebrentwood · · Score: 1

      since sony will lose money on every ps3 sold, you could just buy the ps3 but not buy any bluray discs or games for it.
      thats kind of expensive though

    117. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Since Lik-Sang has been previously "shutdown" by Nintendo and sued by Microsoft, will you be boycotting all three consoles this year?

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    118. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you showed him. He'll never come to your side of the playground again.

  2. WTF!?!?! by trdrstv · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sony's sues someone out fo business for selling their official products?

    1. Re:WTF!?!?! by RichMeatyTaste · · Score: 1

      Amazing isn't it?

      --


      Ever feel like you are driving the getaway car?
    2. Re:WTF!?!?! by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      That's exactly the point.

    3. Re:WTF!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. This basically means that Sony has succeeded legislating through an equation that says importing==piracy.

      This odd non-sequitur sneaked its way just a few months back to the copyright law of my country as well so nice going there. I'm not bitter at all.

    4. Re:WTF!?!?! by DrXym · · Score: 1

      No, they sue somebody for grey importing their products into the EU without their permission. You'd have to ask an economist where the harm is, but Sony clearly think there is some or it wouldn't have taken this action.

  3. Not only Sony by McNihil · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Re:Not only Sony by Blue+Fox+USA · · Score: 1

      So, can the H.K./P.R.C. gov't sue/complain against Sony via WTO/other means for violating the rights of Lik Sang under H.K. law?

    2. Re:Not only Sony by steveo777 · · Score: 1
      Those lawsuites had to do with the sale of the mod chips, not redistributing the products. Sony is the only one with that huge stick up their corporate behind. MS couldn't have a problem because they can barely give their systems away in Asia. Nintendo is better about releasing their products without a massive time or price difference, so I doubt they were ever concerned enough to make any major gripes.

      Am I defending Sony? Hell no, they can suffer the consequences of their actions. I'm on the boycott list. Have been since the root-kit fiasco. I figured they might be able to redeem themselves, but evidence for that happening any time soon is not readily available.

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
  4. Don't understand by pubjames · · Score: 4, Insightful


    I really don't understand how Sony can do this kind of thing. Isn't this the kind of thing the World Trade Organisation is supposed to prevent? I thought that there was supposed to be essentially "free trade" between countries in the WTO. Or is it only free trade that benefits corporations that's allowed, not that which benefits us lowly consumers...

    1. Re:Don't understand by rkcallaghan · · Score: 5, Funny
      pubjames wrote:
      Or is it only free trade that benefits corporations that's allowed, not that which benefits us lowly consumers...
      See, you do understand.

      ~Rebecca
    2. Re:Don't understand by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      Why do you think the hippies don't like globalisation? It's not because it's inherently evil, but because it's been twisted so that it only benefits the exceedingly rich. This is a prime example.

    3. Re:Don't understand by BoberFett · · Score: 1

      Quite right. Large corporations have no problem exporting jobs to places where labor is cheap, but the moment you start importing their products from where they can be purchased cheaply, the shit hits the fan.

    4. Re:Don't understand by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Free trade" would be a one-page agreement saying "There shall be no restrictions on trade between our countries." Signed: the president, the prime minister, the king, etc.

      What we have is not free trade, but is instead "free-er trade". As such it is full of compromises which restrict our freedom.

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
    5. Re:Don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is on "been twisted." Mostly by government, if under heavy influence/lobby by influential corporations.

      So much for "liberalization is bad and hurts the poor."

    6. Re:Don't understand by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      It's a curious case. The only judgement against them was ruled by a UK court, at a hearing they couldn't even attend. And let's face it, their system is so fucked up, it doesn't come as much of a surprise.

      Apart from that, they only say that there are other court cases being persued, and they got scared.

    7. Re:Don't understand by Retardican · · Score: 1

      I really like your sig. Go retardicans!

      --
      Will the War in Iraq get better or worse in 2007? Vote here
    8. Re:Don't understand by hyfe · · Score: 1
      Or is it only free trade that benefits corporations that's allowed, not that which benefits us lowly consumers
      Has the right ever been about anything else? Pragmatism thrumps ideology any time the rich are the ones gaining.

      Free Trade!(as long as it benefits the rich)

      Free Market!(except for patents, copyrights and trademarks which all are necessary evils.. unlike universal healthcare, social-security and all that other fluff)

      Free Press, Free Speech, Free Indivuals!(unless it's corporations wanting to clamp down on what employees do on their spare-time, then it's just and necessary)

      The left may be mis-guided (or in the US' case, doesn't even exist), but there is atleast some semblance of caring for others.

      --
      "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
    9. Re:Don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. If you were allowed to buy directly from those countries, the poor people there could quit the sweatshops and set up their own anarcho-syndicalist co-ops and reap the full profit from their work, without giving 90% of the profit to some global corporation. Therefore the laws have to be rigged in favor of those corporations. Because governments exist solely to service the demands of the rich and powerful, those laws get enacted just so.
        The corporations don't WANT wages to rise over there -- it's to their benefit to have a source of cheap labor. It's to your detriment, though, since rising wages there would mean less incentive for goods to be made abroad, and thus, more jobs over here.

        Which is why we had the whole black bloc thing against the WTO. It was an effective protest inside a larger, ineffective protest. Sure, the media made them look as bad as could be managed, but the only stores that were vandalized were supporters of the WTO, and whaddyaknow, some of them withdrew. It was a lot more effective in hurting the WTO than waving some signs and shouting "Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho!" with the 1970's leftovers.

  5. Re:Would it be too harsh... by trdrstv · · Score: 4, Funny

    I would think that's too harsh. Then again Sony uses their own batteries, so sooner or later their business will go up in flames anyway.

  6. Way to go Sony. by dpaluszek · · Score: 5, Informative

    You are only hurting your business, and complementing your competition.

    Just like the above posters, I will not recommend nor buy anything from Sony. They are a hack company, and I'm done with them.

    1. Re:Way to go Sony. by PhotoBoy · · Score: 1

      Same here, fuck Sony I'll stick with the 360 and Wii for this generation.

  7. AND YET YOU HAVEN'T CANCELLED YOUR PS3 PREORDER... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Love,

    Kieth (Manager EB Games #47564)

  8. Lik-Sang by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

    Sony has attacked lik-sang for massive damage.
    ('nuff said)

    --
    "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
  9. Sony's Fault by SQLz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Lik Sang's entire business revolved around shipping PSPs to Europe? I doubt it.

    1. Re:Sony's Fault by honkycat · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, but as they mention in their explanation, the foreseeable future of this is additional lawsuits striking at their other markets. Rather than run into the ground, they're doing the responsible thing and closing up while they still have the resources to refund/service their customers. Nice to see a company being responsible in this regard.

    2. Re:Sony's Fault by PygmySurfer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, but Sony's win sets precedent for future lawsuits. Sony could in turn sue Lik-Sang for PS2 and PS3 sales. Then Nintendo could do the same thing. Better for them to get out now than face more lawsuits.

    3. Re:Sony's Fault by yanos · · Score: 1

      That's not why they went out of business. Essensially, Sony took legal actions from EVERY GODAMN COUNTRY IN EUROPE. How are you supposed to deal with that many costly lawsuits?

    4. Re:Sony's Fault by Keith+Russell · · Score: 1

      Lik Sang's entire business revolved around importing products from $REGION_X into $REGION_Y, whether the manufacturer liked it or not. With Sony Europe's legal precedent, the floodgates were open for anybody whose products were imported by Lik Sang to sue their pants off. Lik Sang saw their business model crumbling beneath them, and nothing but lawyers in their future. That would scare the bejeezus out of anybody, so they packed it in right away, and denied everybody else's sharks the pleasure of a judicial feeding frenzy.

      --
      This sig intentionally left blank.
    5. Re:Sony's Fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So it is Europe's fault for having so many countries...

      I propose a boycott of Europe!

    6. Re:Sony's Fault by AtomicBomb · · Score: 1

      Lik Sang is a for-profit organisation. It did it brillantly in the last few years. After this lawsuit, its owners can have two choice: 1) keep fighting on the legal battle. Needless to say, it is expensive and no one wants to see all the hard earned retaining capital goes to the lawyers. In addition, they would have to consider the real possiblity that Sony and other evil companies trying to sue them for whatever damages. 2) packing up, dissolve the company and grab whatever that's left....

      It is not ideal. But, if you consider this from the viewpoint of the company owner, you may come up with the same conclusion.

  10. Sad day for gamers everywhere by TheBiGW · · Score: 5, Informative
    This is a sad day for gamers everywhere. Lik-sang were one of the finest gaming websites anywhere in the world. Lets hope the founders setup another website similar to lik-sang very shortly.

    I wonder if play-asia.com are worried?

    --
    Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for an hour. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
  11. Re:Would it be too harsh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope you posted that through an anonimization service...

  12. Huh? by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 1

    Why the hell would Sony give a shit about imports? Because it hurts sales in Europe, but not in China? Who cares? All the money goes to the same source in the end, so what's the big deal?

    1. Re:Huh? by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 1

      Well, it was a London court, so I'll explain in a UK centric way. So they can try make the Brits pay more. As everyone else does as well. Samsung BD-P1000 Blu-Ray Disc Player by Samsung : $999 from amazon.com Samsung BD-P1000/XEU Blu Ray Multi Region Capable DVD Player: £999 from amazon.co.uk i-Tunes track: $0.99 i-Tunes track: £0.77 1 dollar: £0.54 In other words, so they can rip individual customers off. That's why they don't want to give individuals the right to import.

    2. Re:Huh? by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      They don't "officially" sell the PSP in mainland China. I think HK is covered (note that I don't mention Taiwan) and it's possible to get it repaired at service centers on the mainland, though. All PSPs bought in mainland China are gray-market.

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    3. Re:Huh? by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      OK, but why would a UK court support that position?

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    4. Re:Huh? by Znork · · Score: 1

      "so what's the big deal?"

      The big deal is they're using government assisted price discrimination to exact more than the free market price for the product. That creates a wide gap in pricing between units for one market and units for another, despite them being identical and having identical production costs. Companies doing parallel imports hurt their ability to charge what the market will bear, rather than freely compete, which pisses the anticompetetive monopoly huggers in Sony off to no end.

    5. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $imple really.

    6. Re:Huh? by Alsee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      why would a UK court support that position?

      Actually that is still an open question of weather the courts would uphold or throw out Sony's charges against Lik Sang were the case to be actually litigated.

      A large company does not need actually enforcable legal claims in order to litigate a small company (or individual) into bankruptcy. Especially when they start filing lawsuits in fucking foreign courts. Lik Sang is a small Hong Kong company with no presense in the UK, and suddenly they find someone stuffing in they face a notice ok UK court proceedings against them.

      One option is to simply ignoring the foreign court which has no juridiction against them, but that would mean the litigating party (Sony) would win any and all court motions by un-opposed default, no matter how bogus those court motions were, and the attacked company would eternally face the propect that that foreign monstrosity of bogus default rulings would come crashing down on them somehow some day. The eternal headache of an entire foreign legal system trying every method to strike at their business deallings and to get at Lik Sang iself, to enforce the unopposed default rulings against them.

      Another option when you get that notice of foreign court action against you, is to rush out and locate and pay for some lawyer in that country, and to rush to supply that lawyer with the facts and other information of the case, and have him do his research and work to figure out the proper legal strategy and response to the case, and to manage to get that appropriate response filed with the court within the deadline listed on the court papers. Meeting that court deadline is really rough under those circumstances. And then of course you have to pay a legal team to actually fight out that legal battle for however long. And when you *do* take this option, going into that foreign court to argue the case usually involves an implict legal acknowledgement that you *accept* that that court has jurisdiction over you. You generally cannot both argue that the case against you is bogus *and* argue that the court you are in has no authority over you in the first place. By accepting the court's jurisdiction you are placing your head on the chopping block for that random foriegn nation's entire legal system... and you have been running your business perfectly legally under your LOCAL laws and god-knows how many ways you can get screwed because that random foriegn legal system is different.

      And then of court there's the real killer... you go ahead and prepare to fight the good fight in the UK court room.... and before the judge ever rules on anything... you find yourself served with simultaneous court filings in the US and in Austrailia and in France and in Germany and every other country where Sony has lawyers already on in retainer. At which point it's all over. It doesn't matter if your business is 100% legal and if you would win each and every court case. A tiny company like Lik Sang cannot possibly afford the cost of a score or more of lawyers fighting multiple simultaneous court battles in various countries across the globe for years on end.

      Oh, and lets not forget that Sony has been bleeding Lik Sang for YEARS with a series of LEGALLY BOGUS international lawsuits. For example here is a lawsuit over mod chips where Lik Sang was forced to give up the court fight and paid Sony an undislosed extortion payment to survive.... yet here is an ultimate Australian ruling on the issue showing that the mod chips (and Lik Sang's business) was perfectly legal in Australia and proving that Lik Sang was bled legal costs fighting a case where Lik Sang was in the right and paid Sony settlement $$$ to escape for a court battle where Lik Sang was in the right.

      Lik Sang's business annoys Sony. It doesn't matter if Sony has any valid legal claim or not, Sony is big enough that the

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    7. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      [T]he mod chips (and Lik Sang's business) was perfectly legal in Australia

      Not anymore, unfortunately, thanks to our government kowtowing to the US demands over the fucking "Free" Trade Agreement. Possession of a modified console is now a fine-able offence.

    8. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh, and lets not forget that Sony has been bleeding Lik Sang for YEARS with a series of LEGALLY BOGUS international lawsuits. For example here [theregister.co.uk] is a lawsuit over mod chips where Lik Sang was forced to give up the court fight and paid Sony an undislosed extortion payment to survive.... yet here [slashdot.org] is an ultimate Australian ruling on the issue showing that the mod chips (and Lik Sang's business) was perfectly legal in Australia and proving that Lik Sang was bled legal costs fighting a case where Lik Sang was in the right and paid Sony settlement $$$ to escape for a court battle where Lik Sang was in the right."

      so it's legally bogus because it's legal in australia? interesting theory. do you take much interest in russian copyright laws? because if you do, that would make quite a lot of IP rights 'legally bogus' in your system of law, which, thank god, is limited to just.. you.

      lik sang had no legal leg to stand on in this, or previous cases. the idea that big corporations can put 'little guys' (come of it! lik sang are rolling in it post PSP) out of business by default because they can't afford to fight a case, is ludicrous. if they had a business that wasn't the equivalent of 'touting' (they don't buy their stock from distributors - they buy it from retailers and sell on at a profit), and breaking key copyright laws, then they might have stuck around longer.

      a company that has previously sold GBA rom carts and PS/PS2 mod chips does not deserve our sympathies.

    9. Re:Huh? by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Are you stupid?

      so it's legally bogus because it's legal in australia? interesting theory.

      Yes. Absolutely... because it's legal in Australia.

      do you take much interest in russian copyright laws? because if you do, that would make quite a lot of IP rights 'legally bogus' in your system of law, which, thank god, is limited to just.. you.

      They sued in Australia. The lawsuit was bogus under Australian law.

      Moron.

      Sony bled Lik Sang of god-know how much money in legal fees with a rotten lawsuit in Australia to the extent that Lik Sang was ultimately driven to pay Sony extortion money to end the assault... by an Australian lawsuit in an Australian court under Australian law... with a lawsuit which was JUNK under Australian law as I pointed out with my second link.

      Sony maliciously harassed the defendant into bankruptcy by filing a multitude of lawsuits in a multitude of countries.

      lik sang had no legal leg to stand on in this, or previous cases.

      Ah, you're stupid AND you didn't bother to read the link demonstrating that Lik Sang was in the right and that Sony was in the wrong.

      They were selling a product that was perfectly legal under their home country's laws, a product which was perfectly legal under the (Australian) law where they were shipping that product. An absolutely legitimate product no matter how much you or Sony dislike it.

      And as for any OTHER country might have some law making that product illegal:
      (1) Is absolutely irrelevant because it was legal in both the sourse and destination countries; and
      (2) any country that does make it illegal simply has Bad Law against an abso-fucking-lutely legitimate product. But don't even bother fucking wasting my time whining that YOU think it is an illigitimate product, it's a moot argument as per (1) above.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  13. The real question is how the managed to win by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    It would make sense that when you sell a product to someone, it's theirs to do with as they wish, but apparently not...

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:The real question is how the managed to win by trdrstv · · Score: 1
      Ultimately they (Sony) don't have to win, just backrupt them with nuisence suits.

      What I don't understand is the logic behind suing them in the first place... They buy your products and sell them to others to increase your install base...

  14. Remember, kids by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

    Regulation is good.

    --
    Global warming is a cube.
    1. Re:Remember, kids by spun · · Score: 1

      Corporate regulation, government regulation, or market regulation? Should we use government regulation to regulate corporate regulation? Because the market doesn't seem to be regulating jack shit. Free markets don't work when a small cartel of megacorporations regulate the markets and raise the barrier of entry.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    2. Re:Remember, kids by arodland · · Score: 1

      The usual way for "a small cartel of megacorporations" to gain a foothold in the first place is through... you guessed it... government regulation :)

    3. Re:Remember, kids by spun · · Score: 1

      Well, that's the Libertarian Party Line, but I don't buy it. It denies the power of money to effect change on it's own. Price fixing, undercutting, hoarding, money offers so many avenues of control beyond purchasing of politicians and favorable regulations. Government regulation is like an immune system, and big corporations are like AIDS, turning the immune system against itself. The Libertarians say that the immune system is at fault so we need to get rid of it. The problem is really the concentration of wealth and control of natural resources into fewer and fewer hands. Concentration of wealth destroys the free market without any help from government regulation.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    4. Re:Remember, kids by Zarxrax · · Score: 1

      Um... the entire issue here is a case of the free market getting trounced upon by government regulation! You want MORE government regulation? Lik-sang's business practices = free market. Sony shutting them down = government regulation.

    5. Re:Remember, kids by spun · · Score: 1

      No, it was a court decision. In even the most anarchist of Libertarian philosophies, there is still a court system and a powerful corporation like Sony would still have an unfair advantage. That's the problem with 'no government regulation' type philosophies, they gaurantee that there is no fair and equitable way to address the inevitable imbalances of power that will develop.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    6. Re:Remember, kids by arodland · · Score: 1

      I don't follow any "parties". Call it the "student of history line". And stop committing analogy-crime :)

    7. Re:Remember, kids by spun · · Score: 1

      I didn't say you did follow any party, I was just pointing out that that's what Libertarians always say, ignoring the failure of lassez faire capitalism. Certainly a poorly designed governmental control structure is one avenue of attack, but the free market has three major failure modes which are often exploited to the same ends. Namely, imbalance of information, natural monopoly, and externalities.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  15. Let's turn it back at sony by scenestar · · Score: 1

    Allright, I've had it. from now on NO MORE SONY.

    If I absolutely positively must have any of its media(games movies cds etc) or electronics products i'll either warez it or buy it second hand.

    None of my money will ever support those greedy assholes again.

    --
    perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
  16. correct by ProfBooty · · Score: 1

    If the grey market product is cheaper than the offically licensed product it hurts Sony's relationship with their customers, aka the Retail Stores, that sell their products.

    Now the percentage of people who buy outside of the regular retail channel is probably pretty small, but given that Europeans pay more for the same product (DVDs, Games etc) it is believeable that the margins hurt Sony and the regular retail chains.

    --
    Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    1. Re:correct by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Photography has had a grey market for years and manufacturers have more or less resigned themselves to its existence. They take specific steps to protect their business arrangements, Canon USA will not provide warranty service for a non-Canon USA imported item, but they generally do not pressure retailers.

      So camera manufacturers have figured out how to live with it, I'd like to see why Sony has gotten the idea that it is better to sue it out of existence.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    2. Re:correct by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      I think that a large part of their gray-market problem is actually in China. They don't officially sell the PSP here, so everyone imports. Of course, you pay a premium for a 1.5FW PSP (I've seen prices of over $300 for a PSP with 1.5 firmware) but the "downgradable" PSPs are a lot cheaper (those are priced a lot closer to their US price). There is a gray market for DS stuff, but that's because the Chinese DS will only play Chinese games (so I've been told). People who want to play Euro/US/Japanese games need a US/JP/Euro DS.

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    3. Re:correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The bigger picture is globalization seems to only benefit the companies making and selling products in a global market. Through laws and lawsuits, the consumers do not get this benefit of globalization. Companies use cheap labor and lower costs of depressed areas but don't want the cheaper products getting out to the rest of the world.

      Just an example but the way I see it..
      Sony makes product in China, sells same product in China for $5 USD, same product sells US for $50 USD. Someone wants to sell the product intended for China in the US and gets sued? Very odd.

    4. Re:correct by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      Photography has had a grey market for years and manufacturers have more or less resigned themselves to its existence.
      As Sony has shown, that doesn't mean the 'grey' market is legal.

      So camera manufacturers have figured out how to live with it, I'd like to see why Sony has gotten the idea that it is better to sue it out of existence.
      Because the PSP is very profitable for them & (as the Judge has ruled) 'grey' imports are technically illegal.

      FYI - The U.S. has a very similar legal precedents that would support Sony's actions. I talked about it in this post from the previous Sony/Lik-Sang story
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    5. Re:correct by autophile · · Score: 1
      I'd like to see why Sony has gotten the idea that it is better to sue it out of existence.

      Since Weird Al's label is owned by Sony, our friend Al decided to use that relationship to send a parody message to Sony executives. (NOTE: Youtube link, time sensitive). Sony executives, having no sense of humor, took the song at face value.

      --Rob

      --
      Towards the Singularity.
    6. Re:correct by zoftie · · Score: 1

      this sucks, because, how can travelling photographer fix his camera while on assignment in another country? or extended vacation. "Protection" on imported items, is bullshit, because other individuals take it up onto themselves to send items, company is not involved in the process. If they don't make profit in markets where they sell product for cheaper, they won't sell there at all. Warranties are generally same around the world for large companies. I cannot see why company would need to 'protect' market. You mean they don't get as much profit as they would otherwise, by splitting markets. And thats the crux of the problem between global consumers and controlling corporations. This is a new world and they try to force an old world solution onto us. If the product is technically different then sure, don't support it. Like having different components, different and unavailable at any cost components. There is alot of trade between US and Canada, does it mean that I have to stop ordering from amazon because addison wesley has 'different marketing and pricing strategy?' give me break. If I don't buy from their canadian outfit, that means their marketing strategy has failed and me being responsible for that is non-sense. The situation here is same as with recording industry. Draconian laws unfit for a new age of borderless trade, digital distribution control. And in this case, international trade control by manufacturers as oppose to fast an flexible micro merchants, like liksang.

      With exploding batteries and branding me as a thief(if I'd buy from non-sony endorsed outfit), I'd lay off any sony products for quite a while. Before mid nineties, I would sternly recommend everyone to buy Sony for quality and relation with company that has excellent product support. A good well rounded company. At this time, I cannot do so. In fact on both counts as well, company went way downhill on quality. Makes terrible TV sets, doesn't have plasma, their batteries explode. It only recently started thinking that Atrac really sucks and minidisc is not the way to go, even then someone has inspired them to use minidisc like reader in PSP.
      With there and rootkit tactics and forcing small and able online retailer by crude litigation, I see no reason to endorse it anymore.

      I have to look to some other brand, for my sympathies. It will not be sony any time soon.
      my 2c

    7. Re:correct by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Informative

      Even better: they've started to assign custom part numbers based on not only region but even retailer. So, if Target advertises "we will beat any price on this product!" and you bring in an ad from WalMart, turns out that they're not the same product, because one is an (for example) Olympus 340DL digital camera part number AO56789-123, and the other is an Olympus 340DL digital camera part number AO56789-456.
      WalMart actively pressures its suppliers to do this, I've read. Nice, huh?

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  17. Re:Would it be too harsh... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

    Hiring pirates to sink the shipment of PS3s to the US? I hear the russians sell some cheap submarines that could be used to torpedo freight ships once you know which ones transport the PS3s...

    --
    Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  18. RIP Lik-Sang by noname4444 · · Score: 2, Informative

    For anyone who isn't very familiar of Lik-Sang, they were a Hong Kong based company who would ship video games all over the world. Easily one of (if not the) best import websites on the internet.

    Out of my many transactions with them, there was an error only once. A simple call to customer service and they quickly corrected everything. This is truely a sad sad day.

    1. Re:RIP Lik-Sang by speculatrix · · Score: 1

      Lik-sang are also a customer of ours, and a good one too. We're very sad to hear of their plite.

  19. Cry me a river... by peu · · Score: 1

    One dollar here says Lik-Sang will continue their activity from other place where Sony strong arm is not so strong.

    Its good PR to be in their actual position...

    1. Re:Cry me a river... by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      Sony wasn't going after Lik-Sang on their home turf. Sony was hitting them at their weak spot: their market, and Sony has massive power in Lik-Sang's target market.

  20. Boycotts don't work by Robmonster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Boycotts are often called for but they just don't work.

    Even though this move against Lik-Sang is outrageous, it turns out that people just don't care enough to deprive themselves of entertainment.

    --
    I have no sig yet I must scream.
    1. Re:Boycotts don't work by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Boycotts are often called for but they just don't work.

      They usually don't work because a good company diversifies its product line far too much. That's why Phillip Morris can't be put out of business. They own too many key product lines.

      Sony, however, has been scaling back their operations. As it stands right now, their electronics lines are in shambles after cheapening and/or withdrawing a huge number of them. Great stuff like the Clie and the Vaio are simply gone or no longer the great products they once were. As a result, Sony's bread and butter has been their entertainment division. The PS3 push is an attempt to grow that entertainment division by capturing the living room. By loudly making our position clear to the public, there's a good chance we could cause a major disruption in thier entertainment products.
    2. Re:Boycotts don't work by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      Even though this move against Lik-Sang is outrageous, it turns out that people just don't care enough to deprive themselves of entertainment.

      I do. I saw the trailer for Ghost Rider, and wanted to see it. Now that I know it's a Sony picture, I'm not going.

      Fuck Sony. And fuck the UK courts too - what the hell is happening to that country?

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    3. Re:Boycotts don't work by McNihil · · Score: 0

      "...here's a good chance we could cause a major disruption in thier entertainment products."

      hahahaha... much like Windows was twarted because it was a shoddy product back in the day.

      Sorry it doesn't fly like that, welcome to reality kid.

    4. Re:Boycotts don't work by Buran · · Score: 1

      it turns out that people just don't care enough to deprive themselves of entertainment.

      Heaven forbid anyone want to enjoy life and think of something outside of their jobs or stupid (as most is) family/friends infighting/drama. Wow, people want to enjoy themselves. Film at eleven!

    5. Re:Boycotts don't work by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      They also have too many customers. You'd need a powerful organization (plus a compelling message) to get the average Sony customer to be willing pass on a product they may prefer or pay more for a competetor's product. Most customers are probably only occasional buyers and have no idea who makes it or cares. They are going on features and cost. There is also the feeling that your boycott isn't going to make a dent, just like the feeling you get if you vote for a 3rd party candidate in the US.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    6. Re:Boycotts don't work by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Boycotts are often called for but they just don't work.
      Wrong -- insufficiently complete boycotts don't work. Boycotts are very effective provided that:

      1. Enough people participate to make the cost of ignoring the boycott greater than the cost savings or revenue increase associated with whatever actions prompted the boycott.

      2. The company that is being boycotted sees the boycott as being a long-term issue.

      The following factors increase the likelihood of a boycott working against Sony:

      1. Sony depends on volume sales for profitability. Their non-unit costs are significant (advertising, marketing, admin costs, etc) which means that they need to sell a lot of units of each product to make a profit.
      2. Sony is aware of the bad rep they are accumulating. Should that rep cross over into the mainstream, it could _really_ hurt their bottom line. Companies with already-weak public images are more vulnerable to boycotts.

      There are some factors that help Sony withstand a boycott:

      1. Most of their products are non-commodity goods. One cannot simply substitute movie X from Sony with movie Y from Columbia/Tristar in the market. This is true of any of their IP-derived products (music, games, etc), so consumers are less likely to go without the Sony product. This is especially true with the game industry, as the field of competitors is very small.
      2. Sony is an extremely large company with deep pockets. It's quite possible that they can weather any smaller boycott of a few years duration (and given the short-term memory of at least the American consumer, even a few years is more than enough).
      3. Sony is a global corporation, and the larger the scale of a boycott, the harder it is to pull off.

      I'm sure I've missed a lot of factors, but it is a fallacy to believe that boycotts don't work. Any company that ignores their customer base for too long will inevitably lose market share (unless, of course, there are market inequities (like monopoly status for IP distribution)) to their competitors.

      My point is that a boycott WILL help (if only only a small scale), as long as it's a vocal boycott that hits the press. What's needed is a Sony insider to write a scathing tell-all book that makes the non-fiction best-seller list :).
      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    7. Re:Boycotts don't work by foobsr · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Read about Brent Spar.

      Quote: ... By this time the call for a boycott of Shell products was being heeded across much of continental northern Europe, damaging Shell's profitability as well as brand image.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    8. Re:Boycotts don't work by quantum+bit · · Score: 3, Informative

      As someone who has worked on many of them over the last 5-6 years, I can tell you that the Vaio (at least the laptop line) was never a great product.

    9. Re:Boycotts don't work by eMbry00s · · Score: 1

      This is true, and also the reason to why I hate when people say vote with your feet/dollars.

      People who say that often don't take into account that some have more dollars than others, and thus have quite an advantage. It's just not a way to replace the democratic one-person-one-vote system. It's especially bad when people tell this to demonstrators, critics, or such, BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY VOTING WITH THEIR FEET.

    10. Re:Boycotts don't work by ScislaC · · Score: 1

      I agree with the post, but for note, Columbia/Tristar is owned by Sony. ;)

    11. Re:Boycotts don't work by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Thanks.

      Interestingly enough, that clearly outlines another problem with boycotts against massive conglomerates -- it's easy enough to boycott a brand, but hard to boycott a company with literally thousands of brands.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    12. Re:Boycotts don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > 1. Enough people participate

      And that's where almost every boycott fails. It would be nice, if a PS3 boycott really would work, but it simply won't happen. Do not underestimate the power of Sony's fanboys!

    13. Re:Boycotts don't work by theRiallatar · · Score: 1

      Don't you usually pay less for a Sony Competitor's comparable product?

    14. Re:Boycotts don't work by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Boycotts are very effective provided that:

      1. Enough people participate to make the cost of ignoring the boycott greater than the cost savings or revenue increase associated with whatever actions prompted the boycott.

      2. The company that is being boycotted sees the boycott as being a long-term issue.


      Sure, IF that happens, it can be effective. But that doesn't address the root problem of how to get people to boycott a product. The most important factor there is a clear, equivalent alternative. For example, a "don't buy gas" boycott (and those do go around!) is stupid. A "don't buy from Chevron, they are evil and do this and that, please buy from Shell" (not that I have any opinion on Chevron vs Shell, it's just an example) might have a better chance. Burger King vs McDonald's, Best Buy vs Circuit City, whatever.

      I guess you did mention that non-commodity goods would help Sony withstand a boycott - but I don't think it's as much withstand as make it a total non-starter. And even in the relatively commodity electronics Sony just has SO many products that it would take a book just to list alternatives (don't buy a Sony TV, buy Panasonic. Don't buy a Sony Walkman, buy an iPod. Don't buy a Sony-Ericsson phone, buy a Nokia... and just try to convince /. readers to buy an XBox360 instead of a PS3 ;)

    15. Re:Boycotts don't work by pele_smk · · Score: 1

      This sounds like the voice of a non-voter. EVERYONE'S VOTE COUNTS!!! Even if you dont hit Sony in the pockets, if you simply don't purchase Sony products from a specific store, (EB games possibly?) The store will be affected. The store will in turn look at what happened to profits for that store and move to remedy the problem. If the problem is Sony product not selling, then why carry it? They'll order less of the product that isn't selling and even better none at all. After the first store stops selling you're on your way to the WORLD!!!! So come on everyone!! Everyone has the power to turn this place around.

    16. Re:Boycotts don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care? Hardly.

      I would bet that if you were to ask 1000 completely random playstation owners what the hell a "lik sang" is, 995 of 'em would say they hadn't a clue in the world.

      Face it-- the grey market imports are simply something most folks have not a clue about.

      For a boycott to work, you have to have a significant number of people participate. For that to happen, there has to be a significant number of people with a clue.

    17. Re:Boycotts don't work by Knos · · Score: 2, Informative

      Also, interestingly, calling for a boycott is actually illegal in some countries. Like France. I'm wondering about other countries.

      --
      . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .
      may u!sh 2 sm!le at dz!z bad nn.!m!tat!ion
    18. Re:Boycotts don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boycotts are often called for but they just don't work.

      K, So.... change in plan. Buy a PS3, and illegally copy "every" game they have. Then rev-eng their Online-service protocol. Release a OSS server to take away their subscripton revenue. Call it "Sinux".

    19. Re:Boycotts don't work by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      Even though this move against Lik-Sang is outrageous, it turns out that people just don't care enough to deprive themselves of entertainment.
      This was true last time when after the rootkit I caved and bought Ultraviolet and Underworld 2, but with the falling quality of mass entertainment in general and the rise in anti-consumer behaviour by entire industries, I reckon I could stick to my boycott this time.
    20. Re:Boycotts don't work by Vivieus · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's only illegal in France if the call comes from (rival) companies or targets a particular company.

      --
      ___
      *insert sig here*
  21. Replacement? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    So what's a good alternative website for ordering gear from?

    Also, I'm looking for GBA game dev "home-brew" related hardware. Any recommended sites?

    Cheers

    1. Re:Replacement? by revlayle · · Score: 1

      you can try play-asia.com, dunno how their prices and services are to lik-sang. i know they operate in a similar manner, but only beer to their site a couple of times ever.

    2. Re:Replacement? by Kamineko · · Score: 2, Informative
      www.play-asia.com are pretty cool. I've ordered various obscure gadgetry from them in the past with no trouble at all. ^_^

      I also use a site called 'Jandaman's Import Video Game Accessories', but I'm not sure if they're still online.

    3. Re:Replacement? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Occassionally cheaper (has loads of discounted items), sometimes more expensive and a much larger selection. Downsides are no free shipping on anything (though shipping is dirt cheap) and can't use EU bank transfers (Lik-Sang had an account in Germany and allowed direct debiting for people in the country, convenient and fast), you have to use Moneybookers which isn't expensive but adds some time to the ordering process. Since Moneybookers takes more attention and time I prefer ordering from Lik-Sang when all other things are equal.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  22. Re:Two words for sony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get a Mac.

  23. your all on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Sony was right to do what they did in this case.

    Lik-Sang was given the right to distribute products within a certain region, they broke the terms of their contract with sony and now they're closing their doors, and blaming it on sony.

    You make the bed you sleep in.. Lik-Sang chose to go outside the bounds of their contract, and are trying to ride high on a ton of anti-sony fanboy diatribe.

    boohoo for them.

    btw.. this happens all the time.. it's called the "grey market" or "black market".. it happens with everything from automobiles to tvs

    1. Re:your all on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However right you think they might be, it's still bad PR for Sony. They deserve every bit of it.

    2. Re:your all on crack by pandrijeczko · · Score: 5, Funny
      One second...

      Would you like to just temporarily remove those Sony salesman's genitals from your mouth and repeat what you just said? I couldn't understand you the first time...

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    3. Re:your all on crack by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      The right to sell your own property is inalienable.

    4. Re:your all on crack by John+Fulmer · · Score: 1

      > You make the bed you sleep in.. Lik-Sang chose to go outside the
      > bounds of their contract, and are trying to ride high on a ton of
      > anti-sony fanboy diatribe.

      I'm trying to figure out how a company 'rides high' on 'being put out of business through lawsuits'.

      Darl? Is that you?

    5. Re:your all on crack by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      Depends on the relevant legislation.

      Just as laws can't contradict the constitution (I'm talking about how it works here in Argentina, and I believe also in the US), contracts can't be upheld over contradicting laws. That is, theoretically, if you put something on a contract that goes against a law (like say, we sign a contract according to which you become my slave), the contract can't be enforced and may be declared void in court (as it contradicts the law declaring slavery illegal).

      Since this involves UK and maybe other laws, it'd be nice if someone who knows about that could explain how it goes? (preferably a lawyer:))

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
    6. Re:your all on crack by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Just as laws can't contradict the constitution

      OT, but what would be the point in a constitution if laws could contradict it?

    7. Re:your all on crack by acherusia · · Score: 1

      To give the writers a warm feeling of accomplishment, and the ability to wave that accomplishment in front of their partisans, of course.

    8. Re:your all on crack by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      Well, to someone not familiar with the concept, it could look like it's set of general guidelines for lawmakers, that could be bent or changed by new laws as time passes and society changes. Sadly, that is what one of our former presidents thought, apparently (or something in that vein), as he changed the constitution to allow his reelection.

      He got away with it, so it seems that a constitution's purpose is not always so obvious =P

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
    9. Re:your all on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Lik-Sang was given the right to distribute products within a certain region, they broke the terms of their contract with sony and now they're closing their doors, and blaming it on sony.

      And Sony were so morally upstanding and not-at-all hypocritical, that Sony's own top directors in Europe recieved Sony products through Lik-Sang:

      "Furthermore, Sony have failed to disclose to the London High Court that not only the world wide gaming community in more than 100 countries relied on Lik-Sang for their gaming needs, but also Sony Europe's very own top directors repeatedly got their Sony PSP hard or software imports in nicely packed Lik-Sang parcels with free Lik-Sang Mugs or Lik-Sang Badge Holders, starting just two days after Japan's official release, as early as 14th of December 2004 (more than nine months earlier than the legal action). The list of PSP related Sony Europe orders reads like the who's who of the videogames industry, and includes Ray Maguire (Managing Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd), Alan Duncan (UK Marketing Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd), Chris Sorrell (Creative Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd), Rob Parkin (Development Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Limited), just to name a few.

      To hell with Sony. As if their PS3 development cycle wasn't enough of a joke, they go and pull stunts like this, bleeding a smaller company dry just because they can do less price gouging in Europe with them around. I'm done with Sony, not going near any of their stuff again.

    10. Re:your all on crack by kfg · · Score: 3, Informative

      What on Earth are you smokin'?

      I used to sell Sony batteries in my retail store. I had no contract with Sony. I did not need Sony's permission. Sony didn't even know I existed; and liked it that way.

      I could have sold Sony TVs, Game machines, whatever on the same terms.

      I bought them from someone who owned them. I resold them. It's a pretty straightforward equation. Sony did not rely on contract issues in the lawsuit (if Lik-Sang got their stuff under contract from Sony, Sony could have just stopped selling to them. Problem solved).

      No, Sony invoked consumer protection law; just as consumer protection law would now prevent me from selling certain . . . Sony batteries.

      KFG

    11. Re:your all on crack by Kenshin · · Score: 1

      When it comes to stuff like this, there's business contracts involved.

      Lik-Sang broke contracts, and got sued. Multiple times.

      Contracts take precedent over personal freedom, otherwise everyone would break them on a whim.

      For example, the business I worked for could only sell a certain company's filters in our specific region. If we had tried to sell them outside of that region, we would have been cut-off and/or sued by our supplier. It was AGREED UPON in a contract.

      It sucks. Big time. But it's business. (Also, nothing's stopping some guy in one region privately selling his stuff to a guy in another region. As long as he doesn't make a business out of it.)

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    12. Re:your all on crack by wfberg · · Score: 1

      Sony was right to do what they did in this case.

      Lik-Sang was given the right to distribute products within a certain region, they broke the terms of their contract with sony and now they're closing their doors, and blaming it on sony.


      1) the fact that those were the terms of the contract, doesn't mean those terms are legal (and not void)
      2) if they are legal, they may not have been entered into voluntarily (Sony is a monopolist w.r.t. Sony products), this makes for a very shaky basis for a contract
      3) if the above are taken as read, and the whole thing is legal, that doesn't mean Sony are right. If everything that is legal is right, then we can get rid of Congress because no law needs to be changed or written ever again! I'd posit that this is fairly unlikely.

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    13. Re:your all on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lik-Sang was given the right to distribute products within a certain region, they broke the terms of their contract with sony

      What the hell are you talking about? Sony argued to the courts that no one else could import a bona-fide Sony product to Europe because that might make Sony look bad because the power adapters on the bona-fide Sony products being imported might not be as good with the local electical standards as non-imported bona-fide Sony products. How Sony won with the specious line of reasoning I will never know (anyone buying an import from an importer knows this is a risk and they assume it -- Sony has not a thing to do with it). Worse, as I understand, it there existed no real risk with the electrical standard issue because the bona-fide Sony product being imported conformed to local electrical standards anyways. But even if it had not, the European court ruled incorrectly in Sony's favor.

      So, I ask you again, where do you get the idea Lik-Sang had signed a contract with Sony agreeing not to import bona-fide Sony products into Europe, or that such a anti-consumer non-competitive contract would be even enforeable?

    14. Re:your all on crack by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

      For example, the business I worked for could only sell a certain company's filters in our specific region. If we had tried to sell them outside of that region, we would have been cut-off and/or sued by our supplier. It was AGREED UPON in a contract.

      Exactly. The only resourse you have when someone breaks one of these extended contracts is to break it. The actual "contract" is trading X dollars for Y products. Once that's complete, he buyer has no real interest in complying with arbitray decrees by the seller. Sony can stop doing business with them, sure. That shouldn't prevent a company from buying PS3s from other companies and selling them to whomever they want. And Sony somehow got to judge to say no one on the planet can sell a physical device made by them without say-so because of "intellectual property."

    15. Re:your all on crack by Kenshin · · Score: 1

      What I said went completely over your head.

      Lik-Sang isn't a CONSUMER, so something as simplistic as "The actual 'contract' is trading X dollars for Y products" is utter nonsense. A retail contract involves many other conditions, including when and where you can sell it. (ie: Street dates for games, not selling products meant for one region in another.) They signed a contract to get their hands on these goods, and by breaking that contract they opened themselves to the option of LEGAL recourse. (Yes, contracts are bound by law. This isn't a casual handshake.)

      Small game shops buy from smaller local distributors, so their hands aren't as tied-down, but when you're dealing in volume (like Lik-Sang) you have to buy from major distributors or directly from the manufacturer itself.

      "That shouldn't prevent a company from buying PS3s from other companies and selling them to whomever they want."

      As I said, let's see them walk into the HK equivalent of Best Buy and ask for 5,000 PS3s... and at cost, not retail.

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    16. Re:your all on crack by aaronl · · Score: 1

      The way it tends to work in the US is that if a portion of your contract attempts to do something illegal, or contradict something that there is specific protection for/against, then that portion is void. The rest of the contract would continue to be in force in most US states.

    17. Re:your all on crack by Alchemar · · Score: 1

      You seem to have a strong opinion and vague concept of markets to back it up. See if this helps:

      A free market which is suppose to be the system we have is defined as unregulated or controlled:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

      The black market involved buying and selling things illegally:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

      A grey market means through channels not intended from the manufacturere:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_market

      People are getting upset, because sony is using their position as copyright holder to destroy the free market and make the grey market a black market.
       
          Copyrights were intended to give an incetive for people to make creative works. Not control a global economy so they can set the highest price each individual market can bare by closing out all trade, or depriving people from having access to a creative work just because it was not profitable in their sector.

    18. Re:your all on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You doth assume too much.

      There is no such agreement. Lik-Sang could (should) have been able to sell to anyone they want.

      How do I know this?

      Well, it is rather simple.

      The easy answer is that distributors (as opposed to wholesalers) are not the subject of such contracts. If they were, you'd see a lot more of this.

      But more than that, it is obvious because Sony didn't use a breach-of-contract mechanism to attack them. They used a Trademark .

      In fact, Sony isn't even a party to Lik-Sangs' sales. Lik-Sang doesn't buy from Sony and they don't sell to Sony. There is no contract. So Sony can only stop them if they're infringing some other legal right of theirs.

      So Sony sued them - not in Hong Kong, where Lik-Sang is based and both their buying and selling takes place, but in Europe, where Sony has more influence.

      And Sony didn't just sue Lik-Sang once for their supposed violation; they've launched multiple suits across several different areas of law to try to achieve exactly what it seems they've achieved. If they just wanted Lik-Sang to stop, that might have been possible. But they want them out of business instead.

    19. Re:your all on crack by startled · · Score: 1

      Lik-Sang was given the right to distribute products within a certain region, they broke the terms of their contract with sony and now they're closing their doors, and blaming it on sony.

      I didn't see any mention of breach of contract in the linked articles, which were admittedly a little thin. All they said was that "grey importing PS2, PSP or PS3 into the EU, without the express permission of SCE is illegal", but that doesn't make it clear to me that any contract existed between Lik-Sang and Sony. Do you have a link to a better article that explains more of what happened?

    20. Re:your all on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "As I said, let's see them walk into the HK equivalent of Best Buy and ask for 5,000 PS3s... and at cost, not retail."

      Why not? Import costs tend to be slightly more (unless you're in the EU, apparently) than buying one locally. That could well cover the markup from retail (aren't retail margins on hardware razor-thin anyway?)

    21. Re:your all on crack by Alsee · · Score: 1

      (Pre-Script: based on your whitepost.org.uk link I am presuming you are British)

      what would be the point in a constitution if laws could contradict it?

      It's great that you consider that so blatantly obvious, but many other countries do not have the same principals and assumptions as our own. A system of government may pretty much be treat their constitution as merely the first in the laws, and that whoever writes the laws is ultimately in charge. That they can overwrite or modify the constitution through the ordinary law writing process. They don't have the concept that a court judge gets power ABOVE that of the law writers, courts with the power to evaluate and strike down the legislation of the duly authorized law writers.

      Hell, right here in America I keep hearing the yahoos bitching about "activists judges" striking down various laws. Yahoos ranting about democracy and the proper majority will creating those laws, and that some lone judge or small group of judges is violating democracy with their rulings. Yahoos ranting on the intolerability of "unaccountable" judges imposing things on the nation against democratic majority will. It seems that lately there has been an endless stream of proposed legislation seeking different ways to strip this power away from the courts in different "hot button" issues. I am appalled to say that Congress has actually passed some of these into law. These court-stripping laws still need themselves to be tested in court, and I damn well pray that the courts have the good sense to say that any law attempting to legislatively strip power from the courts is *itself* inherently unconstitutional. Here's a link discussing the court stripping issue, and listing many proposed and passed laws. I particularly love the evil fucking irony that one of these bills is actually entitled "the Constitution Restoration Act of 2004".

      And for a glimpse into the US political sides on this issue... as far as I can tell every single court stripping initiative has come from the Republicans / Right / Family Values Religious Conservatives. Oh, and another irony... the Conservative/Right who keep bitching about the "evil Liberal/Left activist courts" that need to be "reigned in" for striking down certain laws.... those people are completely oblivious on the point that the US Suppreme Court is stacked 7 to 2 with Conservative/Right appointed judges over Liberal/Left appointed judges. It doesn't dawn on them that if a 7 to 2 Conservative stacked court is striking down Conservative hot-button issue laws, that maybe it's because those particular laws and those particular Conservative agenda items *actually are* unconstitutional, and that the US Constitution simply does not say what they what they wish to beleive the Constitution says on those issues. Most of them don't look at or care what the Constitution actually says, they just presume that the Constitution must be in line with their values and goals.

      Oops, I went off on a rant. heh. Oh well. At least it was a rant that was dead on target with the issue. What good is a constitution if the legislature is permitted any mechanism to evade judicial constitutional challenge. God damn morons attempting to "defend and preserve the nation".... and their chosen means to do so is by scrapping the Constitution and constitutional review. Sigh.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    22. Re:your all on crack by jimicus · · Score: 1
      As you correctly surmise, I am in the UK.

      Thing is, we don't have a written constitution.

      What we have is:
      • Hundreds of years of case law and European laws which trump our own.
      • A non-elected second house of government, who must approve anything the first house try and put through before it may become law.

      Yes, you heard that last bit right. Thing is, until recently, members of the non-elected house (the "House of Lords") tended to be from well off (and therefore better educated and not having to pander to an electorate who sometimes frankly don't know what's good for them) backgrounds.

      While it sounds like a complete contradiction in terms, democracy-wise, the upshot is that the well-educated people who aren't looking out for the Next Big Vote Winner were generally reasonably good at toning down or outright dismissing badly written laws before they were passed. Most of the people in the first house (the "House of Commons", as we call it) I wouldn't trust to open a tin of tuna.

      Unfortunately, the current government is doing everything it can to obliterate anything which might stand in their way. I'm talking things like the loss of the automatic right to a jury trial, and replacing most of the people in the House of Lords with cronies who can be depended upon to vote in favour of the government.

      Myself, I don't see the point in a second house if it's going to be appointed by the people currently in power, but it seems that this minor issue has been glossed over.
    23. Re:your all on crack by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      If that was the case Sony would have sued them in a Chinese court over breach of contract instead of a British court over trademark infringement.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    24. Re:your all on crack by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Amusingly, I have a passing familiarity with the hereditary House of Lords issue. Such a thing is absolutely positively unacceptable and intolerable...

      in theory.

      Yet in practice every single time that the House of Lords does happen to come across my screen in some notable news item, they invariably turn out to be the heroes of the story. It's one of those things where I can't figure out whether to laugh or cry or what.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    25. Re:your all on crack by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      Sony is a monopolist w.r.t. Sony products

      Please don't tell me that's meant to be a pejorative. That a company is a monopolist over their own products. Please.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    26. Re:your all on crack by justchris · · Score: 1

      Well, to be fair, our American 'forefathers' were educated, financially well off people who wrote the Constitution themselves because they knew what people needed better than the people themselves did.

      --
      just some guy
    27. Re:your all on crack by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
      Actually, what amazes me about this is that a director of Sony couldn't get a "sample" of their own merchandise, in house, for nothing/cost.

      I worked in network engineering for the outsourcing arm of a computing multinational (not with a three letter initial, big blue, but with a shorter, two letter initial). As part of our monitoring, we also looked after the Australian MD's frame relay link from home to the office (about ten years ago, 512k wasn't bad at all). I know for a fact his three kids all had top of the line *our brand* notebooks. I somehow doubt (though easily afforded) they were bought at all - or if they were, most definitely not at retail.

    28. Re:your all on crack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're blaming Sony for having to close, and how is that wrong? Who/What would they blame? Global warming? Sony sued them, not global warming. If someone sued you and you lost $100,000, then you'd blame that person/entity that sued you.

      And AFAIK, the "grey market" and "black market" are different, the "black" being more illegal.

    29. Re:your all on crack by xantho · · Score: 1

      Usually, that's only the case if there's a severability clause, which means that a portion that is declared unenforceable is struck from the contract, and the rest remains in place. Not that a well written contract wouldn't take into account the possibility of that happening, it's just that the thing has to be in there for severability to be a part of the contract.

    30. Re:your all on crack by wfberg · · Score: 1

      Sony is a monopolist w.r.t. Sony products

      Please don't tell me that's meant to be a pejorative. That a company is a monopolist over their own products. Please.


      Many companies aren't monopolists over their own products because they manufacture or deal in things called 'commodoties'. Many companies try to de-commodotize their items, by using branding etc., but in the case of Sony, they actually are a party which has a great market power in some well-defined markets, where they have established vertical monopolies. You can't make PlayStation games without paying Sony, for example. Contrast this with making after-market parts for automobiles. In a market with only 3 major players, agressively imposing vertical restrictions can very easily spill over in predatory trade practices. With its playstation franchise, Sony is in a very different market from milk, grain, TV sets, speedboats, clothes, etc. etc.

      You did realize the story was about playstation consoles, games and accesories, right?

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
  24. Well, crap. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I may not have been the biggest Lik-Sang customer ever, in fact apart from a few relatively small purchases I mainly used their site for window-shopping, drooling over all the stuff I couldn't afford yet but wanted to save up for. They were often the only way to avoid the cesspits of eBay for certain things, and they always went above and beyond in terms of customer service for me.

    Sure, they were a Hong Kong import/export warehouse who wrote websites in broken English, but they really seemed to care about making people happy more than the rest of them that just want to shift merchandise. They had news. They had reviews. They had style.

    I feel like I've just lost the modern Internet version of the classic little mom-and-pop shop that always had the coolest stuff.

    1. Re:Well, crap. by forkazoo · · Score: 1
      I may not have been the biggest Lik-Sang customer ever, in fact apart from a few relatively small purchases I mainly used their site for window-shopping, drooling over all the stuff I couldn't afford yet but wanted to save up for. They were often the only way to avoid the cesspits of eBay for certain things, and they always went above and beyond in terms of customer service for me.


      Liklewise. I really liked their site. Now, I wish I had bought more stuff to support them in their legal battle. I never thought this might happen. Does anybody know of a similar company that can be the new recipient of the geek love?
    2. Re:Well, Crap. by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've seen a device also from Datel at my local Circuit City (Fry's not in my area), that eschews the HDD for a compactflash slot. It runs about USD 40, I think.

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    3. Re:Well, Crap. by Maul · · Score: 1

      Sony stops the free market from thwarting their regional price fixing schemes, and damages homebrew in one fell swoop. Yay!

      --

      "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

    4. Re:Well, Crap. by Sabotage · · Score: 1

      Look into the SuperCard family of products... I'm at work, so I can't offer much in the way of links, but if you do a little googling and some research at scdev.org, you'll find quite a bit of information.

    5. Re:Well, crap. by twistedsymphony · · Score: 2, Informative

      Play-Asia.com is probably the next biggest video game importer I can think of. though they're more heavy on the games while Lik-Sang was more heavy on the hardware...

      I think a lot of people don't even realize that Lik-Sang manufactured a number of their own controller adapters under the "SmartJoy" name, Not only will they stop importing products but you'll have a hard time finding anymore playstation to Gamecube adapters, and other great products like the SmartJoy frag which allowed you to use a keyboard and mouse with the Xbox.

  25. clarification please by free+space · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I read the linked articles and I can't get it..is this a copyright infringement lawsuit or an equipment safety one?

    Sony keeps talking about voltage levels and such but the suit is always labelled as "intellectual property". Which is it?

    Also, in the case it's IP, doesn't the doctrine of first sale allow anyone to resell the copyrighted stuff any way he or she wishes?

    1. Re:clarification please by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Legally, it's a trademark (I think) issue. Intellectual property, but not strictly copyright. trademark law does a manufacturer to licence sale exclusively to a region, and prevent import.

      But they need to justify their actiuons to the public. They can't sell the lie that this is unfair competition. Sony can't be competing unfairly with itself. So they come up with a justification for PR purposes.

      The justification is that they care about consumer safety. Apparently they're obliged to sell death traps under Chinese safety legislation.

    2. Re:clarification please by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      It's a trademark one.

      You can't sell a product that's trademarked without the permission of the trademark holder.

      The same rule was used years ago to stop Tesco selling grey import levis jeans.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    3. Re:clarification please by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Is that so? IANAL, but my understanding was you can sell what you like, but if you don't have the permission of the trademark holder you can't use the trademark.

      Now of course, in the real world no trademark holder in their right mind is going to argue about Tesco's selling shedloads of their product by putting up a big poster saying "SPECIAL OFFER ON $PRODUCT" - unless it's someone like Levis who don't want their product "devalued" in the eyes of the UK consumer. It'd be rather hard for other shops to continue to sell Levi jeans at £50+ where Tescos are selling the exact same pair of jeans for £30.

      AIUI, Levis sued under trademark law and Tescos were in the interesting position of being free to continue to sell Levi's jeans - provided they didn't use any of Levi's trademarks in so doing. And it's rather hard to sell a pair of Levi's when the first thing you've got to do before selling them is remove any mark or label which identifies them as levi's.

    4. Re:clarification please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure "caring about consumers' safety" doesn't include the millions of defective, potentially deadly batteries they sold.

    5. Re:clarification please by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      It's an "intellectual property[sic]" issue disguised as an equipment safety issue, in order to trick a judge into ruling in Sony's favor.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:clarification please by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Have you got a source? My initial reaction was "bullshit", but I don't know, we live in a crazy world.

      A trademark is only applies to doing trade (business) by claiming, or implying that they are the trademark holders (the company). But because they are official products and they are only selling them without any trademark infringement, there should be no problem.

    7. Re:clarification please by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      No. It's a PR lie. But one that doesn't immediately sound like a lie.

    8. Re:clarification please by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's all that broad or the media companies would have shut down used sales by using their trademarks easily.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    9. Re:clarification please by oliverthered · · Score: 1
      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  26. If you can't beat them, sue them to death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sony is simply using the perfected in the usa method of suing a company to death. It doesn't matter if they are right or wrong, the legal fees required to fight such things are monumental. Sony went out of their way to kill their company there is no "if" "and"s or "but"s about it. Had Sony been interested in a fair lawsuit they would have brought just one up against them with multiple charges rather than multiple suits with individual charges.

  27. Just A Prelude Perhaps by blueZhift · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Too bad for Lik-Sang. They sold a lot of cool stuff and was definitely near the top of the list if you wanted to import consoles or games. While one can understand Sony's behaviour from a certain point of view, it still seems really odd to go after a company that actively promotes their products. If Sony is in such bad shape, that the perceived losses due to Lik-Sang's activities are significant to them, then I wonder if the end of Lik-Sang is a prelude to the end of Sony if the PS3 transition goes poorly. Just how close to the edge of failure is Sony? Will Korean archrival Samsung come in and buy what's left if Sony totally tanks? Yeah, that Samsung part is total wild outta the a** speculation, but it is widely known that Sony is not in the best of shape.

    1. Re:Just A Prelude Perhaps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "While one can understand Sony's behaviour from a certain point of view, it still seems really odd to go after a company that actively promotes their products."

      Truly. Usually, hardware is a loss leader; Sony makes no money on the sale of that hardware, actually loses money on the sale so that they can profit on the selling of games (and development platforms/licenses, etc.) and whatever other software might be out there.

      I do not know if the PSP was a loss leader (and no longer care, not being in the market for one now (more on that below)), but usually game consoles (not handheld/portables) were. Companies like Sony would make the bulk of their money from customers who buy the games, UMD format movies, etc.

      Eliminating those customers should mean lost sales to wherever they were importing to. Even those customers who buy imported games likely will buy games domestically as they become more and more tied to the hardware.

      Seems a stupid move, but to Sony's stupidity, it isn't. They aren't just in business to make profit; they attribute profit to control, whether that be control of imports, satisfying domestic retailers/authorized sales and keeping them warm and fuzzy, or in proprietary formats.

      To Sony--I have a choice in what I buy. I had in the past couple of months decided to get an mp3 player, a movie player (largish screen), and a laptop. I went to Lik-Sang to see what options there were, what might be released, etc.

      I normally don't go out of my way to boycott companies but I will choose one company over another if I decide one company just sucks; I try to stay informed. That laptop I am buying? You're no longer on the short list (and you were on the top one, aside from a Panasonic import). The mini-U series I was looking at for $2,000 is no longer a sale. I hadn't gotten off my ass to look at portables, only knowing the Zune and ipod, but if you have a portable, I no longer care. The PS3? I'd rather buy an Xbox, that's how low you've come (I'm buying a Wii next spring sometime.)

  28. Sony not the only one by Noonian+Soong · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's a pity Lik Sang closes because I really liked that shop. It was especially easy to order there because they had bank accounts in many countries so I didn't have to pay for international bank transfers.
    I also have to add that Sony is not the only company that restricted game imports from Japan. Nintendo has done it before with the N64 and as much as I like Nintendo, I have never understood the reason for that restriction. It's the same with DVDs - if the publisher in my country produces an acceptable version, only a few people will import the game/DVD just to get it a few days earlier. If the localized version is inferior to the Japanese version, more people will import it. So it's just a simple market mechanism and why should a company bother to change this?

    --
    The strength of a civilization is not measured by its ability to fight wars, but rather by its ability to prevent them.
  29. What's the alternative? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Boycotts don't work because consumers don't like giving stuff up.

    In this case, you could always just pirate it instead of buying. Still gives them mindshare, but no profits. Seem to me that's the only way you'd ever accomplish a Sony boycott.

    Consumers are sheep; unless provided an equally-attractive alternative, they'll never really give anything they enjoy up, no matter how repugnant its production might be.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:What's the alternative? by lymond01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Consumers are sheep.

      You can call some people sheep all of the time, and you can call all people sheep some of the time, but you can't call all people sheep all of the time (yes, even Republicans...).

      I, my good people, am Nike-Free going on 8 years. They definitely have the largest range of nice sportswear, but their business practices turn my stomach and close my wallet. Just have to decide to do it.

    2. Re:What's the alternative? by Otter · · Score: 1
      Consumers are sheep; unless provided an equally-attractive alternative, they'll never really give anything they enjoy up, no matter how repugnant its production might be.

      Sorry, who is this "they"? The only people I see ranting and raving about how modchips are a fundamental human right but not worth giving up James Bond: Casino Royale over are you guys.

    3. Re:What's the alternative? by NekoXP · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am sure Nike really miss the few hundred dollars you'd spend on them, compared to the many billions they make off everyone else.

      At the end of the day, you can't effectively boycott a company which takes in so much cash per week as Nike, Sony or so on. You may win morally and feel nice inside but they will never see any impact on their bottom line. They probably own a bunch of brands you buy anyway, you just don't know it. It's pretty hard to do when these companies are so big and have so many assets and sub-brands.

      However, doing it to the PS3 might be easy; you can make Sony Computer Entertainment look up from their beanbag chairs, by making the Wii the top selling console this Christmas. Or the XBox360. It won't take much. Or do things like buy a DS instead of a PSP - but, well, everyone is doing that ANYWAY. Your choice.

      That would be easy to do given their problems with production we so hear rumors about. It only takes a hiccup over that holiday buying period for them to take notice. After years of domination of the console market, why not just show that over 2 or 3 weeks, you can knock them off the CHARTS (not lose them money or mindshare..) and stop them being so smug? Then they get the moral message of it.

      You can buy a PS3 after Christmas if you are not still too disgusted with them.

      Depriving them of money or mindshare isn't the answer, making a recordable, long-lived statement is, and I think having them lose the holiday season top-seller contest is a prime target.

    4. Re:What's the alternative? by jbarket · · Score: 1

      Where, exactly, do you see modchips for sale on their site?

      --

      -----
      jonathan barket
    5. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's OK. I always buy two of everything I get from Nike to make up for your purchases.

    6. Re:What's the alternative? by omeomi · · Score: 1

      I, my good people, am Nike-Free going on 8 years. They definitely have the largest range of nice sportswear, but their business practices turn my stomach and close my wallet. Just have to decide to do it.

      Pfft, I've been Nike-free for 26 years (which is also my age)...I didn't have the money for them when I was a kid. By the time I could afford the shoes, I noticed that they didn't fit my feet well anyway, and I'm not the sort of person that buys a brand just because it's popular.

      Unfortunately, nomatter how well deserved, a Sony boycott stands no chance of working. The only successful boycotts have been because of the passion of the groups undertaking the boycott. The Montgomery Bus Boycott comes to mind. There have been a few evangelical boycotts in the past that have been successful at censoring major media outlets in the short-term, but even those have been ridiculously short-lived because they didn't have the support of mainstream Americans.

      That said, I won't be terribly surprised if the price-point of the PS3 proves to be a disaster for that division of Sony.

    7. Re:What's the alternative? by tomee · · Score: 1

      Boycotts don't "work" because people don't know or don't understand why they should give the stuff up. Rootkits just won't do it. Unless you have videos of sony managers setting fire to bunnies, most people probably won't care enough. But as long as even one person is taking part in the boycott, it works. It may not do much, but that's like expecting the $5 you donated to some third world village to turn it into a bustling metropolis. Every little bit helps.

    8. Re:What's the alternative? by Traiklin · · Score: 1

      I've been Nike free for my whole life, hell I've been name brand free my whole life.

      Why must I buy a pair of fucking shoes for $80+ when a pair that are $20 are just as good (if not BETTER)? same goes for pants, shirts, you name it, the only time I have ever bought clothing that is name brand is when it was on clearance or was cheaper then the non name brand (which rarely happens).

      I wonder how long it will be till sony decides to go after something like newegg, or any online retailer like that (since they have international shipping). it sucks that lik-sang didn't have the money (or the lawyers) to really fight this case cause they honestly could of won it.

      Of course Sony being a big company knew this, so they took the usuall Big Buisness cop out, Sue and keep it going till the company has no money left then "Drop" the lawsuit because of it.

    9. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of pirating, go with open source games

      http://osswin.sourceforge.net/games.html
      http://loll.sourceforge.net/linux/links/Games/inde x.html

      That way you won't have the need for not only $ony-Bony, but also Micro$haft and Pretendo. Micro$haft and Pretendo are just as evil as $ony-Bony, they too are against importers. Just take a look at all of the consoles by all three console manufacturers, they have blocked imports in some way or another without a mod. With the money saved from not purchasing the games, you can use the money to support the Open-Source movement. By supporting the Open Source movement, more people will know about Open Sorce and begin moving over to it, leaving the closed $ource developers in the cold where they belong.

    10. Re:What's the alternative? by iainl · · Score: 5, Funny

      Good idea - could you give me a torrent link where I could download a PS3?

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    11. Re:What's the alternative? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      Lik-Sang hasn't sold modchips in four years. However, they are the only distributor of great products like the LCD Compatible Top Gun light gun.

    12. Re:What's the alternative? by goldspider · · Score: 1

      An important message sent by a boycott is that we can do without Sony's product.

      A boycott is a tempting justification for copyright infringement. But all piracy does is tell Sony that their product is still in demand, and in turn gives them justification for additional heavy-handed measures.

      In this context, piracy is the easy, selfish way to protest. Do the truly principled thing and do without these products entirely. It sends a much more effective message.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    13. Re:What's the alternative? by slaad · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In this case, you could always just pirate it instead of buying. Still gives them mindshare, but no profits. Seem to me that's the only way you'd ever accomplish a Sony boycott.

      The other option is that if you're going to buy something, buy it used. Technically it adds a slight value to things if they're more re-sellable, but none of your money will go directly back to them.

      --


      ~Warning!~ The above is encrypted using rot676!
    14. Re:What's the alternative? by @madeus · · Score: 1

      At the end of the day, you can't effectively boycott a company which takes in so much cash per week as Nike, Sony or so on. You may win morally and feel nice inside but they will never see any impact on their bottom line.

      If that were true though, companies like Nike wouldn't have spent so much money trying to repair damage to the brand to get consumers back 'on side' (I remember seeing Nike videos after the details about Nike sweatshops first appearing in the press, that were an attempt to show how Nike had cleaned up their act).

      It's also worth bearing in mind consumer confidence impacts the share price too (meaning company executives have significant impetuous to keep it in mind). Consumer awareness of how big business operaters is higher than it's ever been and their is considerable public pressure on companies to be seen to behave ethically and responsibly - think of all the adverts you seen from companies like BP ('Beyond Petroleum' indeed!) and Shell about how 'environmentally friendly' they are.

      Big companies devote a significant amount of reasources worrying about their public image and how favourably potential customers view them (apparently either not at Sony, or the people in Sony that are paid to worry about that sort of thing have very little clout).

    15. Re:What's the alternative? by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      but, well, everyone is doing that ANYWAY
      Lucky you- my school is full of students with PSPs, staff members with PSPs, faculty members with PSPs, even a couple of staff members with 2 PSPs. Lots of those people played DSes for a couple of weeks, then went on playing their PSPs. I'm the only person in school with a DS (still in use- I asked one classmate about the DS he was using on a school trip last year, and he said that he never used it since then) and even the teachers taunt me about it. I'll be OK, I suppose, but it just shows that non-Americans buy lots more PSPs than Americans do (lots of stores in the electronics market in downtown only sell PSPs, or they keep their DS stuff low-key, because "no one buys them anyway" according to one, but NDSBBS.com is a prime example of how the DS community in China is- a bunch of "less-than-ethical" people who download pirated ROMs to play on flash cartridges)- why me?

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    16. Re:What's the alternative? by Jerf · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Consumers are sheep;
      People who call other people "sheep" because they don't share your priorities are arrogant assholes.

      "People" have no reason to know Lik-Sang is being shut down, and no reason to care. Seriously, why should they? What priority should Lik-Sang displace? How well things are at work? Should I take time off from spending time with my family or any number of other things in my life to Take Action(TM) about a small company that I've only barely heard of?

      You can't care about everything. Shall I call you a sheep because you don't devote 10 hours a week to the plight of African diamond miners? Or because you didn't shout out to Breast Cancer awareness in your post?

      Any given human can only worry about so many things at a time. Many, many, many of them are way more important than whether Sony is shutting down Lik-Sang. It may be an interesting story and maybe some people should work on it, but calling people "sheep" because they can't keep up with every sin, both real and perceived, of every corporation they deal with is just arrogant.

      I guarantee you you don't even meet your own standard for "non-sheepness", if you took the time to articulate it. (Of course, most people who toss around the word "sheep" seem to simply know they aren't a sheep.) The reason I can guarantee this is that, for example, to explain this situation to my wife who probably isn't even aware that games are imported because they are never released here, let alone who Lik-Sang is, would take several minutes. In order to worry about all the things of a similar magnitude in life that occur would take way more than 100% of your life. We are not sheep for not spending more than 100% of our time worrying about your particular choice of sins in the world.
    17. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my contracts professor, when discussing power in re contract theory, stated that boycotts dont work and pirating/stealing shit works out much better.

    18. Re:What's the alternative? by MilenCent · · Score: 2, Informative

      They can indeed work, and have worked in the past. Just ask Proctor and Gamble.

      If a company takes some controversial practice that upsets enough people that they boycott, then it does not have to drive the company into unprofitability to be effective. Sony has a duty to its stockholders to maximize profits? They aren't getting as much of those as they could be if people are purposely avoiding their products simply because Sony is selling them.

      The things that make it difficult for a boycott against Sony to build up steam to the point where it could be effective are:
      - Sony is a conglomerate of a different nature than P&G, they are in many businesses that are not readily identified with Sony, of varying degrees of evil. Lots of people use Sony products who will not know about the boycott, or care about Lik-Sang. It could severely affect, however, their video game business, on which the future of the company is being staked. Lots of the culture of the United States, ultimately, has its source in Sony, which means to completely boycott them would mean leading a somewhat monkish existence. Which I'm sure will come as no great change for us Slashdotters.
      - The will of the fairly anarchic geek community. "Yeah, I hate Sony with da passion and I'd certainly never by-- oh look Spiderman 3 is coming out!" It's harder to get geeks riled up to, say, Moral Majority or George W. levels of ire because they're so --don't laugh-- reasonable on the average. They must be more certain a drastic action is right before they'll take it, and are more capable than the average of deciding its rightness for themselves.
      - Bullheadedness at Sony. The boycotters must be willing to accept that, if a boycott does significantly affect Sony's profits, then it has worked even if Sony rides that boycott all the way down the drain.
      - The popular perception that boycotts don't work. I'm doing my bit to help against that, right now.

    19. Re:What's the alternative? by iainl · · Score: 1

      I've just bought an XBox 360, and I'll soon be buying a HD-DVD player. Is it still boycotting when you don't have a choice?

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    20. Re:What's the alternative? by siriuskase · · Score: 1

      Boycotting Sony would be like boycotting porn. Gettng on a bus is a public act, all you need is enough people to stand near the bus stop giving dirty looks and people will join your boycott. You can't stand in front of every store selling Sony stuff. Sony stuff is mostly consumed in the privacy of your home. Broadcast is very private, and the stuff in your mailbox, only the shipper knows for sure.

      --
      If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
    21. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jerf? More like Jerk...

    22. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May I be the first to suggest sonytorrents.com ?

    23. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that you can, but to be effective you need to publicize, get people involved and lots of people to NOISILY join in. Calls for boycotts need to be publicized on mainstream media... and repeatedly showing off some of their misdeeds. Granted, that is not easy, but you can get them to move. As you say, the hard thing is to get people to care.

    24. Re:What's the alternative? by 'nother+poster · · Score: 1

      Thanks! That's so nice of you. Now ship me my free shit. ;)

    25. Re:What's the alternative? by goldspider · · Score: 1

      I suppose you never considered doing without entirely. This is entertainment, not something you -must- have.

      Imagine how the civil rights movement would have turned out if the participants in the Montgomery bus boycott suffered from a similar lack of conviction.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    26. Re:What's the alternative? by Some_Llama · · Score: 2, Funny

      "I, ... am Nike-Free going on 8 years... Just have to decide to do it."

      I think you mean:

        Boycott Nike "Just do it".

    27. Re:What's the alternative? by Windowser · · Score: 1

      You say "hell I've been name brand free my whole life"
      and then you say "the only time I have ever bought clothing that is name brand is when it was on clearance or was cheaper then the non name brand"

      Which is it ?

      --
      Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
    28. Re:What's the alternative? by Firehed · · Score: 1
      At the end of the day, you can't effectively boycott a company which takes in so much cash per week as Nike, Sony or so on. You may win morally and feel nice inside but they will never see any impact on their bottom line. They probably own a bunch of brands you buy anyway, you just don't know it. It's pretty hard to do when these companies are so big and have so many assets and sub-brands.

      That attitude is why it never works. Everyone thinks that way, and keeps on buying. If you don't try, you can't win. I won't buy media from anyone anymore (secondhand on rare occasions, but that's the extent of it) because I'm disgusted with how all of the media companies treat me. I doubt it'll do a damn thing, but I have no right to complain as long as I pay for the stuff.

      Above all else, I think the problem is that most of the anti-Sony news seems to stick to geeky sites like Slashdot. I've largely given up on mainstream news, but I never see them reporting on things like this - Rich Asshats of America shutting down innocent sites for reselling their products, or infecting computers with rootkits (which I think should gain the mainstream name of 'supervirus', since it might actually mean something to Joe Sixpack). Nope, the news only goes to sites that's largely full of Sony-haters.
      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    29. Re:What's the alternative? by giorgiofr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wait a second there... you are partially right, but you went too far (just like he did). It's true that you can't care about everything; but being a sheep is not about not "keeping up with every sin, both real and perceived, of every corporation they deal with": it is about knowing about a problem but not bothering to THINK about it and DECIDE whether it's necessary to act. You're not a sheep if you don't know the details of this Sony case or don't care about Sony at all. You are, on the other hand, a sheep if you know that company XYZ is doing something you dislike but you just go with the flow and meh your way through the problem (neologism! you heard it here first, folks). You are a sheep if you think your political system is broken but don't take the time to at least think about such problem and try to devise a solution; and at the end of the day you vote for your usual party while muttering that everybody sucks anyway.
      Come on, you know the sheep. Judging by your post you are not one, but you see them around you. You know who they are and why some people call them so.
      Oh and finally. I might not meet my own standards for non-sheepness but at least I can look at myself and assess my sheep level, fully aware of the possibility of there being a problem with it. This does not stop me from seeing other people's sheepness, and in fact it makes it easier.

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    30. Re:What's the alternative? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      One person boycotting won't make a dent just as one person voting doesn't make a dent but there's not just one person deciding whether to do each, there's many more and everyone who reaches the conclusion that he can't do anything and drops out is a loss for the rest. If any potential boycotter thinks it's pointless there won't be anyone boycotting and future boycotters will think "noone's boycotting, why should I?". Someone has to start. If that's me, so be it.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    31. Re:What's the alternative? by festers · · Score: 1

      Great rant. Too bad it has nothing to do with whether or not consumers are really "sheep." Your point that we can't all worry about the same things is very valid, just not relevant to what you quoted. The majority of consumers will buy whatever they are told to buy with little-to-no thought involved. That makes them sheep. Don't like it? Then do something to change it, starting with yourself.

      --


      -------
      "Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
    32. Re:What's the alternative? by Schmendr1ck · · Score: 1
      Maybe a little OT, but sometimes a $100 pair of shoes is better than a $20 pair. Years of buying my sneakers at Payless contributed to my development of plantar fasciitis (inflammation of the connective tissues along the bottom of the foot). I made an informed choice to start wearing New Balance, because a) the quality is significantly higher, b) they come in a variety of styles to accommodate different feet, and c) the large majority of them are manufactured in the U.S., not by cheap overseas child labor.

      The point I'm trying to make is that there is a difference between spending more money to buy a fashionable name and spending more money to buy higher quality and/or support a company whose business model you like. There are a lot of ways to spend your disposable income, folks. Do a little research, find a company whose products you like and whose business model is reputable, and give them your money. Survival of the fittest ensues.

      (And for the record, I'm Best Buy-free for about 4 years now because of their business model. I also don't own a PS2 and will not buy a PS3 largely because of the same issues with Sony Entertainment. It hasn't hurt either company, but it makes me feel good.)

    33. Re:What's the alternative? by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I had someone explain to me once why an American Sony boycott wouldn't work: Sony already makes most of their money in Asia. If the *Japanese* boycotted Sony en masse, you'd see the company making some changes. The US market for Sony comes after the Asian and European markets -- it's a dumping market, really; just like US products get dumped in other parts of the world.

    34. Re:What's the alternative? by dan828 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You can call some people sheep all of the time, and you can call all people sheep some of the time, but you can't call all people sheep all of the time (yes, even Republicans...).

      Being an arrogant insulting ass is no way to convert people to your cause. Except maybe other arrogant insulting asses that need a cause to be arrogant and insulting about.

    35. Re:What's the alternative? by Howserx · · Score: 1

      how about this then... Everyone go to their cd stands and rip every CD and DVD that is made by sony and share it, torrent it, upload it to warez sites, whatever. Make their content free for everyone. if people can't be deprived of their entertainment then let's at least make it easy for them to find it for free. Sure this may just reinforce in their minds the cost to them because of piracy , but this is an easy way to hit sony in the bank.

      --
      I support the troops. I pay f'ing taxes.
    36. Re:What's the alternative? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I'm just one person, but together with the GP poster I do not use Nike products. I've received them as gifts perodically, and then I may or may not use them depending on who gave it to me. If I can't return it I usually give it to the local shelter. Same with Sony. I used to be a huge Sony fanboi My entire studio used to be Sony. Al the BetaCam stuff still is (obviously), and anything that has not yet died is still in use. New gear is not Sony, however, and hasn't been for almost 5 years now.
      I've been mildly supprised with Lucky Goldstar's performance and have switched my monitors to them with the last upgrade.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    37. Re:What's the alternative? by Zabu · · Score: 0
      Boycotts don't work because consumers don't like giving stuff up.

      Wrong! Boycotts don't work because you don't forward your myspace bulletins
      --
      It's all good.
    38. Re:What's the alternative? by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 1
      And for the record, I'm Best Buy-free for about 4 years now because of their business model.
      Same here. I don't know what aspects of their business model you're referring to, but for me, when I go to Best Buy and I see a DVD set "On Sale" for $49.99 that is on Amazon.com at a regular price of $14.99, I am not going to buy it at Best Buy, and in fact I'll get outright angry at Best Buy for trying to take my hard earned money of which I never seem to have enough.

      I consider that kind of markup to be theft, or at least extreme dishonesty - representing that that's a fair price for the product when I know it isn't. Of course its value to ME plays into that, but I'm talking just the price on the shelf versus the website - why is it a fair price in one place and not the other?

      I WILL pay a higher price to buy something in a store if only for the convenience of buying it - but only if it's within several dollars of the online price.
      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    39. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sort of like yourself? You ignorant ass.

    40. Re:What's the alternative? by Stalyn · · Score: 1

      A "sheep" is a person who does not think about the issues at hand. It really has nothing to do with caring. Except perhaps caring about thinking. And a sheep is a person who does not care about thinking.

      It's not like the majority of the problems in the world are inherently complex. The solutions to the problems may indeed be complex to enact but restating the problem and understanding the problem is not. A person who spends at most 30 minutes of their day reading the news from a variety of sources will be informed enough to understand the majority of the world's problems. Not only that but spending an additional 10 minutes evaluating what they read will supply a person with enough information to participate in an informed discussion.

      See a "sheep" will never take part in any of those activities. Because they would rather let someone else do the thinking for them. That is the definition of a sheep. If perhaps you do not care about a particular issue because you have evaluated it yourself and could come with an argument for not caring about said issue; you are not a sheep. But if you are not even willing to inform yourself in order to make such a decision and instead allow others to make the decisions for you. You are a sheep.

      --
      The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
    41. Re:What's the alternative? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Is your school owned by Sony or something? That's the weirdest story I've heard in a while.

    42. Re:What's the alternative? by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. The vast majority of consumers will buy what they like. Just because it's not what you like doesn't mean they did it because someone told them to. That sort of statement is beyond arrogant and into ludicrous.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    43. Re:What's the alternative? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      As a former Lik-Sang customer, I think Lik-Sang owes me the explanation why I can't give them money anymore.

      While I will be still purchasing sony equipment(it's virtually unavoidable, Sony manufactures everything, i ouwldn't be surprised if we find a time machine from the year 2854 with the Sony logo on it crashed somewhere), I'm still incredibly upset that they would chose to do this rather than lose a few sales to people who were diligent enough to import and not have to wait to get their consumer goods. The reason why I'm not boycotting Sony is that they're just consumer goods and should I actually need something that sony might have to make for business or other imporant reasons, I don't want to boycott them over what amounts to luxuries. While the root kit issue might have been a big deal, it's still a matter of luxury.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    44. Re:What's the alternative? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I will be still purchasing sony equipment(it's virtually unavoidable, Sony manufactures everything, i ouwldn't be surprised if we find a time machine from the year 2854 with the Sony logo on it crashed somewhere)

      What in hell are you talking about? What does Sony make that you can't do without? The only Sony thing I think I still use is an alarm clock from the 90s. Everything Sony makes has a better alternative that isn't locked into their proprietary crap (Memory Stick), and is much cheaper.

    45. Re:What's the alternative? by NekoXP · · Score: 1

      A lot of noise only ever gave anyone a reason to shut the door and put in earplugs. Sony can survive an angry mob. Because it is just noise.

      I just think you can't do it if your main focus is to hit them financially.

      They can also survive a financial glitch, or a change in revenue from their entire business. Boycotting Sony now, means all the stores that already have Sony stuff have already paid for it. Stores that need to reorder Sony products - sometime the middle of next year - may not order so many. But a boycott TODAY for the next few months, won't have any effect whatsoever on their bottom line until well after real consumers and boycotters have decided it isn't doing anything.

      (their shareholder filing for the quarter AFTER THAT may be a scare story, but this is.. a year away! Can you convince millions of people to boycott EVERY Sony-related good, forever, in order to make the financial dent that would cause them to shake?)

      Can they really live down "Sony's revolutionary Playstation 3 console at no. 4 in console sale charts last quarter" on every news site? I doubt it. The Gamecube never did. As soon as popular media gets to put a told-you-so, Sony will look up and wonder.. why didn't it sell so many? And why are the sales charts important? Well, because they are updated pretty quickly, whereas the financial repercussions may still be rippling, and then soaked up by consumer apathy and resumption of purchasing Sony goods, or at least been completely negated by whatever new business strategy they pick up over a whole year.

      You can say the same of voting; one man never made a difference (except in Futurama) but 100,000 people might; but then the guy running for President has a lot more tricks up his sleeve than 100,000 people that don't like him. The last 6 years are evidence of that.

      Sony have a lot of resources to make a boycott on financial terms not matter. Print media and news articles are archived forever. Nobody will forget the year that Sony Lost Christmas in just sales terms. All it takes is for everyone to hold off for a month, or buy a Wii instead. Or both. Nobody needs to stop buying Sony forever; just hit them gently in the Baubles. Sales in February don't matter a shit in the games market, so resumption of buying by an apathetic bored Final Fantasy-craving consumer won't matter.

    46. Re:What's the alternative? by Warlock7 · · Score: 1

      And what school do you go to?

      I want to keep my children from being taught by ignorant turds.

    47. Re:What's the alternative? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You can't care about everything. Shall I call you a sheep because you don't devote 10 hours a week to the plight of African diamond miners?

      You don't have to devote time to the plight of African diamond miners to not be a sheep; you just have to be aware of it and not support the companies that do this with your money (i.e., don't buy diamonds). It's not hard, and doesn't take any time. Plus, you can buy your wife some gemstones that are genuinely rare (diamonds are plentiful and nearly worthless) instead, or better yet some nice cheap jewelry that still looks nice.

      If someone tells you that you're buying into a system that does horrible, unethical things, and you continue to buy into that system instead of taking your money elsewhere, then yes, you are a sheep. Being a conscientious consumer doesn't mean hopping on a plane with an assault team and freeing oppressed people around the world, but it does mean making good decisions about where to spend your money so that unethical people are not rewarded for their behavior.

    48. Re:What's the alternative? by Jerf · · Score: 1
      Don't like it? Then do something to change it, starting with yourself.
      I think you missed my point, along with a couple of the other repliers. Do what to change it? I literally do not have the time nor the capability to worry about everything I'm supposed to worry. Literally. Not rhetorically.

      "Learn more" is not a solution. There's too much to learn.

      When I go to the grocery store, I can easily walk out with over fifty distinct products, and as I am adventuresome many are often new to me. How much "thought" am I supposed to allocate to each one, in order to avoid being a "sheep"? A minute? Ten? When am I supposed to actually do some work to earn a living? And that's just grocery shopping.

      "Sheep" is a useless standard, because nobody can meet it. It's an empty insult and I'm tired of seeing it tossed around on Slashdot like it means anything.
    49. Re:What's the alternative? by Warlock7 · · Score: 1

      And a great way for you to end up on the RIAA hit-list.

    50. Re:What's the alternative? by MadJo · · Score: 1

      it makes me wonder, if those people had any taste at all. :)
      What games were they playing?

    51. Re:What's the alternative? by rainman_bc · · Score: 1

      but together with the GP poster I do not use Nike products

      I too, but it has more to do with the fact that it's overpriced than anything else. I prefer Adidas and Puma personally. AFAIK their apparel doesn't come from sweatshops.

      Thing is, this site claims that

              * NIKE
              * Adidas
              * New Balance
              * Puma
              * Reebok
              * Fila USA

      Are all sweatshop employers.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    52. Re:What's the alternative? by Rary · · Score: 1

      And you've missed the point that so many other repliers have tried to explain to you. Avoiding being a "sheep" does not mean being aware of everything there is to be aware of. It simply means acting on the things that you are aware of.

      If you learn about a "corporate sin" that you personally object to, but are unwilling to put up with a mild inconvenience (ie. looking for an alternative), so you just act like you aren't even aware of that "sin", then you are a "sheep". For those of us who actually try to do something with the knowledge we have, it's quite difficult to have any respect for you.

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

    53. Re:What's the alternative? by kirun · · Score: 1

      Wii is already going to be the top Christmas seller (at least worldwide), provided that Nintendo don't screw up big time. For up to the end of 2006, the PS3 production target is 2 million, the Wii production target is 4 million.

      Both numbers may come from a well-shaded part of an analyst, but there you have it.

      --
      I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
    54. Re:What's the alternative? by Wudbaer · · Score: 1

      The problem just is that if you look long enough you will find someone with a pet cause against more or less ANY product/service etc. on the market. At some point it just starts getting really pointless and a waste of time and energy.

      Admittedly there are a lot of issues regarding Sony, but if I take a look for what sometimes really esoteric issues people are called sheep here on Slashdot I can only congratulate the non-sheep for the infinite amount of time they seem to have to pursue sometimes really bizarre issues. Not everything you think is a matter of vital importance is of even mild interest for most other people. It's probably good of you to care, but don't be pissed off if you are the only one.

      But keep calling us sheep, at least we have it wooly and warm. And I'll cheerfully welcome you in our herd once my pet issue comes up that you give a damn about. ;-)

    55. Re:What's the alternative? by millennial · · Score: 1
      He addressed that, y'know:
      The PS2 and PSP games can be purchased used without majorly impacting a boycott, but it's better if anything Sony sits on the shelf.
      --
      I am scientifically inaccurate.
    56. Re:What's the alternative? by brouski · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      And in what alternate universe do you live in that shutting down a former modchip seller even comes close to the civil rights movement?

      --
      Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!
    57. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't care about everything.

      No, but you can care about what you know about. You may be on to this "perceived sin" thing, after all, maybe you don't see Sony installing rootkits on their customers' machines or suing Lik-Sang for buying PSPs and selling them to other people to be something that they should be punished for, but the people who come here, say they're outraged that Sony would do such a thing, and then stand in line at 2AM to buy their products, that's where the designation of "sheep" really shines.

    58. Re:What's the alternative? by AxemRed · · Score: 1

      A sheep is someone who follows the crowd without thinking about why. A sheep, in this case, would be someone who is on here bitching about Sony even though they barely know who Lik-Sang is. The sheep says, "Ya, Sony sucks! (even though I have no idea who Lik-Sang is, and I am definitely buying a PS3!)"

      What you are referring to, is the tendency for consumers to be selfish and intolerant of any kind of discomfort or deprivation, whatsoever. The people exhibiting this trait say, "I hate those Sony bastards!@!#! (but I'm buying a PS3 anyway, because, seriously, how can you expect me to be without the newest next-gen system?!)"

      My thoughts on it are this... Bitch all you want. It doesn't make you a sheep or anything. There's nothing wrong with bitching about something that you don't like. However, don't threaten action unless you, A) Know what you're angry about, and B) Actually plan on following through.

    59. Re:What's the alternative? by Traiklin · · Score: 1

      it's name brand free, cause the stuff that I do happen to own that is name brand I almost never wear.

      I have a cheap flimsy shirt from old navy that was on sale for like $5 (normally $25) and it's lighter and thinner then any of the other shirts I own (which at most I paid $10-$15 for) and I have one pair of Levi pants that I only wear when my others are dirty.

      I have never gone to a store and said "I have GOT to get some *Insert over priced brand name stuff here*!", I go looking for something spacific, I look at price first cause that's what's important to me. When I was younger I went through shoes pretty quick, so I honestly couldn't go to my parents and say "I have to have these air jordans!" considering the brakes on my bike would go out almost every other week (The padding wore down) I would always forget and need to use my shoes to stop, so naturally this wore them down rather quickly.

      everytime I look at something name brand I just don't get the appeal of it, I knew air jordans were worthless yet they were advertised like you could play like jordan if you bought them! there was nothing special about them other then it had jordans logo on it.

      The only Sony things I have in my whole house is my PS2 (never realised it before) a broken PS1 a replacement PS1 & A DVD Burner I had to get after a bad Linux Live CD fried my other one, When I buy electronics (like TV's or DVD players) I look for features firt then go down the line till I reach the price I am after, just like with everything else.

      The PS3 I was all set to get a year/two years ago, then they announced the price of it and I realized I could get a pretty kick ass PC by the time I could get a PS3 (I knew right from the begining that Sony wouldn't be able to make enough PS3's for launch, just like the PS2). To be honest if someone (even a shady group) made a system that let you play the PS3 360 or Wii (even PS2, Xbox or Gamecube) games and it cost a good deal less then the 360 or PS3 from Microsoft and Sony I would buy it since it does the samething only costs less.

    60. Re:What's the alternative? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I wear exclusively Ecco shoes (including dress shoes), except at work where my employer specifies (and pays for) the shoes.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    61. Re:What's the alternative? by acherusia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except if you pay any attention at all to the news about which company is evil today, you can't act on all of it. Or, at least, I can't.

      Offhand, I can think of several dozen companies at the moment that did things that I consider unethical. Jet Blue did their sleep deprivation testing on live planes with passengers. Sony speaks for itself in this context. There was the HP scandal, the e-coli spinach scandal. Going back a bit further, Target blocked the Salvation Army from standing at their door last Christmas. U-haul is generally a disastrous company to deal with. I completely forgot what the Adelphia scandal was, and I can't be bothered to google it. There's AOL, and its customer retention policy. There's pretty much the entire music industry, which I don't think I need to comment on further. There's big scandals, there's minor scandals, there's scandals that I only know about because I work in the industy involved. Etc.

      Some of these things I care about deeply. Some of these things I think are stupid. But even the stuff that I care deeply about is, frankly, stuff I'm probably just not going to remember when I'm out shopping. Sometimes I do. I won't buy stuff that I can tell is Sony anymore. Haven't since the rootkit scandal. I avoid Jiffy Lube because I've heard too many horror stories of Jiffy Lube not doing the work they've been paid to do, and messing up the car in the meantime. I don't buy, or even really listen to music anymore, because hell if I can tell what's even remotely associated with the RIAA or not.

      But I just don't have the energy or the interest to keep track of all the companies that do things I find unethical. If I remember when I'm purchasing, yes. But the odds of me remembering five years down the line, when I might actually have the money to afford to travel, that Jet Blue did a sleep deprivation study without warning the passengers are not high. I might, because I prefer to go on airplanes where I have as low a chance of dying as possible. But I doubt it. I make an effort when I see a company consistently doing unethical activities, but a large part of that is that I don't want them to screw me over too.

      Not to mention subsidiaries. What, should I start studying what companies in every single scandal I care about own/are owned by? I hear about, on average, probably two scandals a day that I care at least a little about. Sometimes more. I flat out do not have time to research all of them. I have class. I have work. I... Okay, I don't have a social life. But I do have Civ IV.

      Theoretically, yes, I could do something about every company that does stuff I disapprove of. But I have other things to do with my life.

      If that makes me a sheep, so be it.

    62. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Boycotts don't work because consumers don't like giving stuff up."

      That and the number of people who actually know about this is pretty small. What percentage of Sony customers do the people who know about this make up? Probably low; and of those, how many were customers of Lik-Sang or care about them? Probably lower. And I'm in that group, I couldn't care less about boycotting Sony for something I've never used or even heard about until today...lawsuits and whatnot happen all the time, most if not all companies have been involved in something questionable leading some group of people to call for a boycott of them, it's tough to buy anything (especially from larger companies) if you boycott over every single little annoyance that comes up.

    63. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're wrong - boycotts do work. Ford is losing billions of dollars because they thought they were clever wasting money advertising to gays, and millions of normal Americans didn't want to be associated with Ford any more. Boycotting does work - it only takes a ten percent drop in sales to really wake up a company. The guy who listed all the films in the original response - none of them are worth seeing anyway!

    64. Re:What's the alternative? by aron1231 · · Score: 1

      There is some confusion here about calling people "sheep", partly because of the topic the term is being related to, and partly because of it's inherent derogatory nature. In reponse to the second quipe, "sheep" is a legitimate descriptor of personal character, just as some people might be termed "hot-headed" or "mild-mannered". Furthermore, people aren't sheep for being uneducated, or for not taking the time to educate themselves about everything. People I would term sheep are people who believe everything they are told. Sheep hear political propoganda and use it as factual arguments for their party. Sheep hear about company A's financial success and take it for pure truth. They DON'T question proposed ideas while taking into account all influential variables. Non-sheepness is questioning anything and everything that is important to you, and finding the truth for yourself.

    65. Re:What's the alternative? by Al+Dimond · · Score: 1

      New Balance? Wow... I read a few years ago an article about how New Balance made their shoes somewhere in New England, had very high worker morale for that industry, and relied on savings on shipping and innovative improvements in efficiency to stay competitive with foreign sweatshops.

      I haven't actively researched this, though, so the article might have just been a fluff piece, or they might have some sweatshops now. When I was in 7th grade I had a pair of NB shoes and my history teacher commented that they were made in the USA (the tag reflected this as well). As a long-distance runner, I'm a big fan of Asics, though.

    66. Re:What's the alternative? by PyrotekNX · · Score: 1

      You can also substitute Blu-ray for HD-DVD.

    67. Re:What's the alternative? by McFadden · · Score: 0
      Sony already makes most of their money in Asia. If the *Japanese* boycotted Sony en masse, you'd see the company making some changes.
      I've made this point before, but I'll make it again because the myth doesn't seem to be going away.


      Sony are doing DISMALLY in Japan. They've lost their huge walkman market to Apple's i-pod. They've lost their television market to Sharp/Pioneer. They tried to compete in the handheld console market and got absolutely trounced by Nintendo's DS. Playstation is all they have left. If they don't do well with PS3, they're in deep deep shit in Japan. Why do you think they announced a big price cut here and nowhere else?

    68. Re:What's the alternative? by Rary · · Score: 1

      "If that makes me a sheep, so be it."

      Actually, based on your post, I'd be inclined to say that you're not a sheep. That's kind of what my previous post was about. It appears that, at least to some extent, you try. That's all that anyone can really ask. Nobody can reasonably expect you to be aware of everything and react to everything accordingly. Just try. That's all.

      The people who piss me off, and who I refer to as "sheep", are the ones who simply don't give a fuck. And the reason they piss me off is because they are the problem. You said that you try to avoid Sony products since the rootkit scandal. That's awesome. But the whole reason Sony can get away with shit like that (and likely will again in the future) is because most people (sheep) don't care, and refuse to do anything about it. And that pisses me off.

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

    69. Re:What's the alternative? by Rary · · Score: 1

      "Not everything you think is a matter of vital importance is of even mild interest for most other people. It's probably good of you to care, but don't be pissed off if you are the only one."

      Don't get me wrong, I agree with what you're saying here. I personally don't even know what the fuck Lik-Sang is, and I certainly won't boycott Sony because of this. I'd be more inclined to boycott them for all kinds of other reasons (rootkit, for one).

      Nobody expects you to jump on everyone else's "pet cause". The real way to not be a sheep is to choose your own pet causes, and then to act on them. But you have to recognize that the reason that all these "pet causes" exist in the first place is because companies can get away with pretty much anything they want because people (sheep) let them.

      Consumers get fucked by companies because consumers let companies fuck them. Those consumers who try to change this reality are understandably annoyed with those who allow it.

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

    70. Re:What's the alternative? by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      I used to wear New Balance running shoes, they were definitely made in the USA, at the time. I've since given up and now wear $10/pair sweatshop shoes from Walmart. The worst part about the sweatshop stuff is that when 90% of people are buying the sweatshop stuff, the non-sweatshop stuff gets even more expensive due to the lack of volume.

      Besides, I'm a grad student now, so I don't feel so bad about sweatshop labor - I'm it.

    71. Re:What's the alternative? by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      Statements like yours are what helps defeat any kind of boycott. People end up just pissing & moaning on a messageboard pretty much in your world. Which in turn lets people feel ok about not flat out boycotting a company. Me personaly? My last Sony product was a 27" Wega TV 3 years ago. Games? "Borrowed."

      My boycott is functioning just fine. Hell me and my group of friends are are slobbering gamers. We don't care what console or company makes a console or game until Sony decided to continualy fuck shit up. A good number of us have worked in the industry too (outside of QA) so we do have an inkling of the innder workings. The industry has issues and the only way to get companies to wake the hell up is a good'ol-fashined, "I'm not buying your shit" boycott. Hell videogames is a market where people are MORE likely to pay attention to a boycott thats been posted online so it's not like it's a Nike boycott. Once you get it down right it becomes "cool" and the drooling masses just hop on board.

    72. Re:What's the alternative? by Wudbaer · · Score: 1

      Well, to that I can fully agree ! :-)

    73. Re:What's the alternative? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Apparently some brainless Sony fan got mod points...

    74. Re:What's the alternative? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
      $ony-Bony, but also Micro$haft and Pretendo

      And people wonder why they're not given any credibility as ACs...

    75. Re:What's the alternative? by 64Bit · · Score: 1

      "they'll never really give anything they enjoy up, no matter how repugnant its production might be."

      Fry: Ewww Slurm comes out of your behind?!?
      Glug glug glug

    76. Re:What's the alternative? by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      People who call other people "sheep" because they don't share your priorities are arrogant assholes.

      ...

      I guarantee you you don't even meet your own standard for "non-sheepness"


        Right. So the problem is that not everyone thinks as clearly as you do on this subject?

      SB
      (arrogant asshole in training)

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    77. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      apparently some brainless anti-sony guy made a troll post

    78. Re:What's the alternative? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Sony batteries, the Floppy drive, monitors, speakers, ICs(hint: the most compatable RGB->NTSC encoder chip is made by Sony)...

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    79. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In what alternate universe did I draw such a comparison?

    80. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everybody tries, though. That's right, everybody. Even the shallowest, stupidest people I've met have a sense of ethics. Maybe its not the most logical sense of ethics, and maybe you wouldn't agree with it, but it is always there and you have to respect that. If you want people to share in your ethics, the best way to do that is to explain your ethics to them without insulting them.

      It's pretty unreasonable to expect everyone to show you their ethical side to avoid being called a "sheep." The only people I know who talk about their ethics to perfect strangers are either extremely unethical, or evangelists.

      (Wait for it...)

      Or both. Ba-dum kssh!

    81. Re:What's the alternative? by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      Not sure- but not a whole lot are actually playing games- it's either video or music (and web browsing).

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    82. Re:What's the alternative? by Rary · · Score: 1

      "Everybody tries, though. That's right, everybody"

      Bullshit.

      Everyone has a sense of ethics. That much I can agree with. However, not everyone is willing to sacrifice their own convenience for their ethics. Many people will shop anywhere, and buy anything, even knowing that doing so is directly and avoidably supporting something that goes against their own ethics.

      The issue is not whether I agree with their ethics. The issue is whether they're willing to do anything about it, and the fact that we all have to put up with the bullshit that companies pull over us because there simply aren't enough people willing to act on their sense of ethics.

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

    83. Re:What's the alternative? by zobier · · Score: 1

      I've got the shits with all this Sony crap too, but you're right - I'm not even going to spare the time for the rest of this discussion.

      --
      Me lost me cookie at the disco.
    84. Re:What's the alternative? by markimusk · · Score: 1

      "Unless you have videos of sony managers setting fire to bunnies,"

      hahaha! thank you! That is hilarious! I just had crap day and that phrase made me laugh out loud. I won't say I spewed my vodka & orange, but that's only because I had just finished swallowing...

      Thank you again eloquent Sir!

    85. Re:What's the alternative? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Sony batteries,

      All those have caught on fire by now. Besides, I don't think mine is made by Sony.

      the Floppy drive,

      Mine's made by Teac. And who still buys floppy drives now anyway? Mine is ancient; if it ever dies, I won't be replacing it.

      monitors,

      None of mine are by Sony. There's tons of monitor makers out there besides Sony, and Sony's not even that great out of the bunch: high prices and not good enough quality to justify it.

      speakers,

      You're kidding, right? There's zillions of speaker makers out there. Who actually buys Sony speakers?

      Sure, Sony makes a lot of stuff. But the previous poster alleged that it was basically impossible NOT to buy Sony stuff ("Sony manufactures everything"). This clearly isn't the case.

    86. Re:What's the alternative? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Hey moron: the guy said "Sony manufactures everything". I haven't seen any case where you couldn't easily avoid buying Sony crap and getting something else. Is pointing this out somehow a troll? I don't think so.

      Just because you disagree or don't like it doesn't mean it's a troll.

    87. Re:What's the alternative? by jibjibjib · · Score: 1

      At my school I have also seen many PSPs and I don't think i've ever seen anyone at school with a DS.

    88. Re:What's the alternative? by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      They were all playing Japanese import games (when they did play- they treated the PSP mostly as an MP3/video player).

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    89. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My point is all three are evil. Pirating does no good as that is copyright infringement and is used as ammo by the three console manufacturers to add digital retrictions management. The best thing is to go with opensource games. The money saved from not purchasing closed source games could go to funding the open source movement. Hell, there is even a handheld system that allows someone to play open. What is the use of using a proprietary game console?

    90. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, that should have been "Hell, there is even a handheld system that allows someone to play open source games. What is the use of using a proprietary game console?"

    91. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is an even better Open Source Gaming System

    92. Re:What's the alternative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But in Hong Kong, here I see about 5 PSPs for every 1 other kind of handheld console...

    93. Re:What's the alternative? by Zentac · · Score: 0

      You can buy a PS3 just fine, they lose gaziljions on those things, just don't buy any games for it, or movies... just wait for a mod chip :)

  30. I bloody hope Play-Asia aren't next... by Channard · · Score: 4, Informative
    .. since I really don't give a monkeys about the PSP, but it's where I've had a bunch of region-free 360 games from for half the UK shelf price. Microsoft have shown no sign of legal action against them yet, but given that Play Asia also sell Sony stuff, I'm a little worried.

    This isn't the first time Lik-Sang have run into trouble. They changed hands a year or two ago when they were being sued for selling mod-chips. I thought they'd at least be safe now, but no. Perhaps Sony should have funnelled the money they spent on the lawsuit into making their SoundStage software half-decent and producing an MP3 player that doesn't use their shitty ATRAC format.

    1. Re:I bloody hope Play-Asia aren't next... by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      OMFG I've been ripped off all this time. Xbox 360 games are typically $110 Australian. Play-asia games are half that!

      You've opened my eyes.

    2. Re:I bloody hope Play-Asia aren't next... by atrizzah · · Score: 1

      Wow. Amazing that Sony's absurd behavior actually makes Microsoft look reasonable

    3. Re:I bloody hope Play-Asia aren't next... by Channard · · Score: 1

      Yes, it is a big money saver. But do remember, it's only games that specifically mention they're region-free. Others on the site that don't mention this will not run on your 360, so remember to check before buying one.

  31. Sony Sucks - Here's Why by N8F8 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Seriously, I can't remember the last time I bought something by Sony.

    DRM Hell
    Proprietary media formats
    Proprietary Memory Hardware
    NO Post-Sale Support

    They've been crapping on customers for a decade.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    1. Re:Sony Sucks - Here's Why by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      They've been crapping on customers for a decade.

      And I predict that they'll be out of business within another decade.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    2. Re:Sony Sucks - Here's Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Seriously, I can't remember the last time I bought something by Sony.

      DRM Hell
      Proprietary media formats
      Proprietary Memory Hardware
      NO Post-Sale Support

      They've been crapping on customers for a decade.

      It couldn't be more apt that the parent was modded "Redundant"; you don't even need to go into detail about how Sony has been fucking consumers in the ass, it's far too obvious ;)

    3. Re:Sony Sucks - Here's Why by robpoe · · Score: 1

      I own a Sony Wega TV .. love it
      2 Sony receivers .. one works, one does not (something about lightning striking the tree outside)
      Sony DVD players

      They do all of the above fairly well...

      And .. I'd buy another. I couldn't care less about video games :)

      --
      = Grow a brain...
  32. Re:Would it be too harsh... by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 1

    Yes, it would be too harsh.

    *please mod informative, please mod informative*

  33. Why they hate the grey market. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They were bypassing Sony's "official" channels and hurting their ability to price discriminate.

    The 'grey market' is an equalizer; it's a basically unified marketplace that defies the attempts of the monopolists to charge different prices for the same thing in different places, by taking advantage of the cheap global transportation that we're blessed with today.

    This is why it's so hated.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Why they hate the grey market. by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Even so, Sony is not the only one doing that in UK. It is something that pisses me of as it is completely clear that Britons are paying a "corporate tax" for their assets. There was at least another case where TESCO (a Wal*Mart like chain) was selling Levi's jeans cheaper (almost half price of the retai price in UK) than Levi's by importing them from other European countries.

      Of course Levi's sued them and won so now Tesco had to sell them at the "suggested retail price".

      Its stupid, the last time I raised the issue with a Briton (I live in britain now) he made all kind of excuses, from the VAT to the shipping costs. But then I showed him the prices of some cameras and even after the 17% VAT + something in shipping and handling the prices in the UK where something like £50 more expensive (for a £200 camera)

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    2. Re:Why they hate the grey market. by czarangelus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I notice that corporations want all the benefits of globalization (ie: cheap labor) with none of the deteraments (cheap imported products.)

      --
      When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
    3. Re:Why they hate the grey market. by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      They were bypassing Sony's "official" channels and hurting their ability to price discriminate.

      Yup, this is why I think Sony's actions should be illegal and not that of the grey importer. They grey importer should be allowed to stay in business, on the condition they make clear to customer the limitations of the purchase ( invalidated warranty, etc ). Why should mega corporations be allowed to have access to a free market and everyone else is told to stick it?

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    4. Re:Why they hate the grey market. by archen · · Score: 1

      The law seems to be supporting them so far.

      I mean why do I have to pay full price on a CD if I already own the tape? I thought the disk was just like $1 and I already owned the copyright by my inital purchase.

      As long as polititians can be bought, corperations will always have the upper hand because they have more money. Which in turn leads to laws which increase their profits. Which allows them to donate to more polititans...

    5. Re:Why they hate the grey market. by cyberdanx · · Score: 1

      Any Briton who doesn't know they get ripped off like this regularly is a moron. Most people realise this when it comes to cars, it shouldn't be so suprising for other stuff. We get ripped off all the friggin' time!

    6. Re:Why they hate the grey market. by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      Mod him up. Here's another link from the time - talking about the impact the ruling might have on software. It's essentially the same problem in both cases, the import of trademarked goods from outside the European Economic Area. It's sad that a company goes out of business, but it's the precedent. We Europeans need to talk to our legislators to try and change this trademark issue, in the age of Internet Commerce we should not be restricted in this way.

    7. Re:Why they hate the grey market. by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Hmm. The issue here probably isn't with the company directly but with the laws that allow them to successfully sue a web site for importing their products, or possibly the laws that govern corporations in the first place. Corporations exist for one reason, and one reason only, to generate profits for their investors. They have a fiduciary duty to maximize their revenues and minimize costs.

      This doesn't absolve Sony of their behaviour, feel free to punish them for it. But it does suggest that you at least also target the governments that pass laws that allow this behaviour to continue. As mentioned above that includes the European Union, Britain and the United States. To do otherwise is to attack the symptoms of a disease rather the disease itself.

      Sony didn't shut Lik-Sang down, they sued them for breaking the law and won. It was Lik-Sang that broke the law in first place leaving themselves vulnerable and it was the EU that passed the laws that they broke. There's plenty of blame to be spread around. If you believe what Lik-Sang was doing should be legal, then both the EU and Sony share the blame for shutting them down.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  34. Fishy? by muel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nothing in this news report explains exactly why Lik-Sang is closing. It makes mention of action against the reselling of PSPs, but it sells plenty of Nintendo hardware and other systems' software...IANAL, but I don't see any precedents set in the most recent ruling that affect software (nor do I see Nintendo legal action brewing on the horizon). Is this a case of Sony being aggressive behind the public's back and ordering Lik-Sang to shut its doors without saying why to avoid future action? Is Lik-Sang using this opportunity to dump the business and divert potentially angry customers at a red herring? This story is dying for more research and explanation.

    1. Re:Fishy? by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Not really... If they can't afford the lawsuit, closing their doors might be the only action
      they've got at their disposal. In reality, they were a primary source for a lot of the enthusiast
      comunity's toys not available in their own respective markets. They weren't hurting in the business
      department.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    2. Re:Fishy? by Jasin+Natael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about, "The kind of world that would harm us for doing something harmless, that helps people get what they want and are willing to pay for, is no world that we want to do business in. And the chance of us losing our savings and the shirt off our back in the next lawsuit are a bit too scary for us to sleep well at night." Just conjecture, but it's how I might feel in their situation...

      --
      True science means that when you re-evaluate the evidence, you re-evaluate your faith.
    3. Re:Fishy? by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      It's because it knows it can't weather the storm of lawsuits about to be launched at it.

      At least if they quit while they're ahead, they'll be able to refund customers orders. If the lawsuits went ahead, the customers wouldn't see a penny - it'd all go to Sony.

    4. Re:Fishy? by Volante3192 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, it's because Sony has filed suits against Lik-Sang in nearly every country of Europe.

      Lik-Sang can either (a) try to defend themselves in the entirety of Europe and get sucked dry, most likely negatively hurting their customers or (b) accept defeat and shut down gracefully, going out with style.

      They don't have the warchest Sony does, and Sony knows it.

    5. Re:Fishy? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      If the lawsuits went ahead, the customers wouldn't see a penny - it'd all go to Sony.

      They could very well be doing it as much out of spite towards the litigious bastards, as out of goodwill towards their customers.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:Fishy? by slim · · Score: 1

      More like, "The safest thing for us to do right now is close up, refund our customers, form a new company, sell our stock to said new company, and carry on trading." (maybe not selling Sony hardware this time).

      Lik-Sang got closed down once before, and sprang back.

    7. Re:Fishy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that's why smugglers are cool. (Not joking: smugglers are cool. When they're not smuggling evil things that is.)

    8. Re:Fishy? by Neoncow · · Score: 1
      If the lawsuits went ahead, the customers wouldn't see a penny - it'd all go to Sony.

      They could very well be doing it as much out of spite towards the litigious bastards, as out of goodwill towards their customers.
      I feel so used.

      And angry with Sony!!
  35. Re:Two words for sony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But you'll still have Sony batteries.

  36. Double standards and stupid by Tellarin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sony suing Lik-Sang is one of the most stupid things I've seen a company do.

    And besides that, it is also a obvious example of double standards. Even Sony directors were huge clients of Lik-Sang.

    For example (as stated in the note):
    - Ray Maguire (Managing Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd)
    - Alan Duncan (UK Marketing Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd)
    - Chris Sorrell (Creative Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd)
    - Rob Parkin (Development Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Limited)

    I'll be avoiding Sony stuff after this...

    1. Re:Double standards and stupid by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      Sony suing Lik-Sang is one of the most stupid things I've seen a company do.

      You must be kidding -- surely you've noticed all the other stupid stuff Sony has been doing lately, right? I mean, yeah, this would be pretty exceptionally stupid for any other company, but for Sony it's just par for the course!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:Double standards and stupid by Sinistar2k · · Score: 1

      A list of four people who purchased PSPs now constitutes being "huge clients"?

      Looks to me like a few folks ordering PSPs to see whether or not Lik-Sang was actually fulfilling orders with PSPs from other territories. It isn't as though Sony Computer Entertainment Europe was withholding PSPs from its executives, forcing them to go to Lik-Sang.

      It's no different, really, than any company purchasing a competitor's product to evaluate or investigate it. Maybe Lik-Sang should have been a little more suspicious of products ordered by folks with Sony addresses. And maybe they should be a little less willing to put customer information in a petulant press release.

      They could have brought that information up during the court proceedings had they actually sent someone there to defend them. Which they did not. Lik-Sang thought they could hide behind Hong Kong jurisdiction and law, only to find that they were wrong. Now they're crying about it publicly. They could have ceased shipments of PSPs a year ago when the suit was filed (filed, mind you, AFTER Sony had won two similar lawsuits against other PSP importers - the chance of Sony winning a third time was quite good) and avoided having to close shop, but they chose to ignore the situation and lost.

      It's their own damn fault for not 1) paying attention to precedent and 2) defending themselves in court.

    3. Re:Double standards and stupid by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Sony has done a load of stupid things lately, but suing Lik Sang out of business is even worse to their reputation than the entire Rootkit fiasco. The rootkit Fiasco only bothered the hardcore PC crowd, most of their core audience either was not affected or simply did not know what a rootkit is. This fiasco while not gaining publicity in the general audience pissed of their best customer base, the people who will buy the ps3 the hardcore gamers, all those who carry the public opinion about the playstation, which to a big degree carries the fate of the entire company. Lik Sang was nothing more than a small leech in Sonys eyes, but killing off this leech could cause a big problem for Sony in the long run because this leech was beloved by many people who indirectly carry the fate of the entire company.

      This thing, while not directly feelable by Sony financially, probably is worse than the Rootkit and the last E3 combined, for Sony.

    4. Re:Double standards and stupid by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Just as people who knew or cared about the rootkit were a small minority of computer users, Lik-Sang customers are a small minority of gamers. I guarantee most of the teenagers who want PS3s couldn't care less.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  37. Re:Two words for sony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Folks at home, that '*cough*' was Trashhalo coughing up blood after being hit by a huge battery explosion. (For massive damage)

  38. This seals the deal. by Maul · · Score: 1

    I won't be purchasing a PS3. Ever.

    --

    "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

  39. Lik-Sang offered great repair products by KIFulgore · · Score: 1
    Now where will I get driver bits that open NES and SNES carts to replace the batteries? Not to mention their many controller-to-USB adapters. So many cool legal products... just gone now.

    This goes with my theory that about 25 mega companies (Disney, Sony, Coke, Time-Warner-AOL, RJ Reynolds, Haliburton, etc.) basically control the whole world. Maybe 50.

    --
    - For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism.
    1. Re:Lik-Sang offered great repair products by Assassin17 · · Score: 1

      That'll teach me to dawdle on getting a SNES controller-to-USB adapter. Do you know where else they are sold? (I can Google, but am wondering if there's somewhere reputable.)

    2. Re:Lik-Sang offered great repair products by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That many?

    3. Re:Lik-Sang offered great repair products by rob1980 · · Score: 1

      Ebay. That's where I got mine.

    4. Re:Lik-Sang offered great repair products by Blue+Fox+USA · · Score: 1
    5. Re:Lik-Sang offered great repair products by twistedsymphony · · Score: 1

      Most of those adapters were actually MADE BY Lik-Sang. One of the major controller adapter manufacturers were going out of business and Lik-Sang bought them up and made them their own. Re-released their line under the "SmartJoy" and a couple of other names. Basically you wont see those things on the market anymore unless some other company decides to pickup where Lik-Sang left off... which probably wont happen at least not for a while.

  40. Does anyone remember the old Sony? by William_Lee · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The one that used to actually make great TVs, decent quality, feature rich consumer electronics devices, revolutionized and revived console gaming with the PSX, after revolutionizing portable music with the walkman?!

    Didn't think so!

    Ever since Sony acquired large media properties, the old Sony has been slowly dismantled piece by piece, as one horrible business decision after another is foisted on the consumer by the influence of the media divisions. If Sony wasn't so concerned about defending their media units (dvds,cds,film,etc.), we wouldn't have had things like the root kit fiasco, crippled MP3 players, and $600 gaming systems. We also might have a company that focuses on what they did best, delivering consumer electronics to a willing market.

    This is just the latest in a string of strong arm tactics from a company that has lost its roots and its way. Apparently, hitting them in the wallet is the only chance of getting them to change. Maybe if the PS3 flops, they will be forced to reexamine their structure and strategy.

    I'm all for the calls of BOYCOTT! I wasn't going to buy an overpriced PS3 anyways, but I'm not going to be buying other Sony products either.

    Lik-Sang was a great, quirky outfit. They'll be sorely missed!

    1. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by Hrodvitnir · · Score: 1

      The one that used to actually make great TVs, decent quality, feature rich consumer electronics devices, revolutionized and revived console gaming with the PSX, after revolutionizing portable music with the walkman?!

      Yeah! And now they run all over your lawn, and make so much noise! Damn kid- er... Sony!

      *waves cane*

      --
      "There are more important things than stopping terrorism. Upholding the Constitution is one of them." - Ars Forumer.
    2. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by oneandoneis2 · · Score: 1

      You missed out the time they revolutionized the music industry by creating the CD.

      They actually pushed for a music distribution method that, being digital, enabled the consumer to make unlimited perfect copies that would never degrade in quality.

      Hard to believe these days, isn't it?

      --
      So.. it has come to this
    3. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually a few days ago the Japanese minister of trade, Akira Amarai, publicly expressed similar concerns. He is worried about Sony's long term competitiveness as well as the effect that the poor reputation of the Sony brand has had on all Japanese electronics in general.

    4. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by gamer4Life · · Score: 0

      That's what happens when the media companies and **AA sinks their teeth into an electronics company. They even have a media guy (Howard Stringer) as CEO. This is all because the media division is crippling their other divisions for it's own benefit and thus making itself look better --and a strong division has more influence in the company than ones that are losing money.

      If you want to boycott Sony, boycott their entertainment products, but buy their electronics, PS3 included. Just don't buy the Blu-ray movies from Sony. With any luck, Sony will "spin-off" their money losing media division and become an electronics company again.

    5. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by LordVader717 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You say "consumer", but the fact is that in them days, the consumer barely knew what these magic "laser discs" were, and he wasn't able to replicate them for about a decade.

    6. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by oneandoneis2 · · Score: 1

      The consumer might not have known, but the record company execs were KEENLY aware of the replication potential of CDs:

      Quote:

      when audio CDs threatened to deliver to consumers a perfect digital master of the original recording on every disc, a worried crowd of record company execs disrupted the launch event, chanting "the truth is in the groove... the truth is in the groove" as a protest.

      Sony had to push pretty hard to get the music industry to accept CDs, and they did it - and in those days, it wasn't so that they could put rootkits on them.

      --
      So.. it has come to this
    7. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by thekm · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why people get mad at "$600 gaming systems" when it's just a factor of what the unit is. Sony would love to sell the machine for $50, but the fact is, they can't. They're already selling you a machine that cost them more than $600 to make! ...gaming machines are actually one of the few items out there where you are actually getting more than you pay for. It's hardly a sign of corporate arrogance or greed (well... you can get to the greed part when you look at the profits of the games, but not the machine itself).

    8. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by William_Lee · · Score: 1
      I don't understand why people get mad at "$600 gaming systems" when it's just a factor of what the unit is. Sony would love to sell the machine for $50, but the fact is, they can't. They're already selling you a machine that cost them more than $600 to make! ...gaming machines are actually one of the few items out there where you are actually getting more than you pay for. It's hardly a sign of corporate arrogance or greed (well... you can get to the greed part when you look at the profits of the games, but not the machine itself).

      People get mad at it for a few reasons. First of all, a $600 pricepoint has never been close to a success in the home console market (I feel the ghost of my old 3DO circling as I write this). I was personally dumb enough to pay that much once in the case of 3DO. It ain't happening again. Consoles are for playing videogames. There was no need for Sony to build in Blue Ray technology in their latest system. From a gamer's perspective, it makes no sense. I also don't see what going with a completely new processor design ala the Cell is getting them other than low production yields at high cost, and a programming nightmare. Sony did not need to build a system that is going to cost $600 to be successful in this round of the console wars.

      The second reason is the fact that $600 buys you a lot of gaming hardware on a PC system. I personally love console gaming, but I've got a gaming PC rig that can handle anything the PS3 can judging from screenshots and impressions, and it does a whole lot of other things better.

      I never thought I'd be saying this, but M$ has done most things right with the Xbox360. Sony should have taken a page from their playbook on this one.

      I also seriously doubt that Sony would like to sell machines for $50. They'd love to find a way to make them for $50 and sell them for whatever the market would bear.

    9. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately Sony of old was not that much better, the german inventor of the Walkman was fighting for decades to get a share of his invention which Sony blatantly copied, he settled a while ago, but the endless trials cost him a fortune and brought him close to bankrupcy. One of the almost unknown stories, that the biggest success of Sony, was a blatant copy, and the real inventor was bullied in court for decades to get his fair share!

    10. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by thekm · · Score: 1

      I wont deny that 600 clams is expensive, and possibly even 'too' expensive... but marketing is more complex than that, and Sony is throwing the PS3 in more than one battle. Regards marketing, there's a lot to be said for simply being the most expensive. Sounds strange, but it's true. Just because you are the most expensive means that many people will buy it. So, throw that in with the better tech, and you have a machine that really is worth $600 and will also sell at $600.

      Regards your PC... not really. It wont play games better, because it's generic, trying to play through generic engines. Consoles are better for games Mhz for Mhz because the developers know what they're writing for, and they know how they can push the machine. It's like the old Commodore64, there was a hard limit as to the amount of sprites you could have on the screen. But one game (commando or something, a top view action scroller) literally doubled the sprites on the screen as they managed to chase the machine drawing the screen with it scanning, giving them a higher limit. This kind of pushing the boundary you can't get when you need to work on a dozen chipsets by a squillion manufacturers. PS3 developers know the machine, and know the playing environemnt... a clear advantage.

      As for BlueRay... just like the PS2 with DVD, they're putting the blueRay in the new beast, and it'll be the cheapest blueRay player on the market. The PS2 was in part the whirlwind success because it was the cheapest consumer DVD player on the market. If anyone wanted DVD, could get the PS2 and the DVD player in the same bundle cheaper than any other player. That's awesome. So when PS3 is here, anyone thinking of getting a BlueRay player is daft not to consider the PS3, because they get a cheaper player, and an uber games machine in the same bundle.

      ...it's great for the PS3, and it's great for the BlueRay format. And I for one also hope that blueRay takes off, simply because it's better technology with a much more potential for the future... not some rehash of the current DVD format. So for all these reasons and more, the PS3 is going to be wonderful, and in all actuality, quite reasonably priced.

      Only thing MS has done right is get out there first... and because there's a lot of water under the bridge now, this may actually help the PS3. The greater public is more likely to percieve the PS3 as the "next gen" to the X360... anways, only time will tell.



      In all truth, I actually want Nintendo to win... where gameplay comes first.

    11. Re:Does anyone remember the old Sony? by evilviper · · Score: 1
      revolutionized and revived console gaming with the PSX,

      Sony's PSX was long AFTER their glory days were over. Just ask any of the millions of people that had their PSX fail just beyond the warranty period.

      There was nothing revolutionary about it, it was just somewhat better at 3D than the Sega Saturn (at the expense of 2D), while being somewhat cheaper.

      Personally, I long for a world where Sony never jumped-in, and Sega is still #2, selling great consoles with great games, rather than the PSX's line of unregulated heaps of crappy games.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  41. Cue the photoshops by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 1

    It's not capitalism when YOU do it!

    Seriously, is it now okay in the UK to ban customers from reselling any products?

  42. Where should they go? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    You are aware they were based out of Hong Kong, right? At least that's my understanding.

    I'm not sure where they should move to, if they want to sell Asian video games to the Western market. I would have thought they were safe there. Sony probably has enough political heft in Japan to make that a non-starter, and I assume that the Chinese would probably happily make life miserable for a "foreign" company in order to score points with the West during the run-up to the Olympics (in the same way that they occasionally crack down on piracy). Russia is busy giving sucky-sucky to everyone and their cousin in order to get admission to the WTO...

    Maybe they could put their servers in Sealand, handle the financial transactions through the Cayman Islands or Switzerland, and drop-ship the packages from anonymous storefronts in major cities in Southeast Asia?

    Cripes, at that point it seems more like operating a terrorist cell than a videogames exporter. Course, if Sony ran the world, there wouldn't be a difference.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Where should they go? by smbarbour · · Score: 1

      The real question, and a point I would use in court, is "What is the real, legal, difference between ordering merchandise online that is not yet available in your country, and travelling to another country and purchasing the merchandise and bringing it back with you (or having it shipped back home)?"

      What really needs to happen across the entire globe is for all transactions be handled as though the customer is standing in the store (or in the event that there is no "store", the "store" is the company headquarters). From there, apply appropriate taxes and any other regulatory fees. This would also be in effect for telephone orders.

      Just because a company wants to control the distribution of its products doesn't necessarily mean that they should be allowed to do so (especially via the courts using false claims).

      It's unfortunate that Lik-Sang didn't fight back in the courtroom by requesting a demonstration as to how the Asian version of the PSP differed from the European version of the PSP (other than the region coding).

      It will take a lot for me to purchase another Sony product. It will take a hell of a game to get me to buy a PS3 (perhaps a Dark Cloud 3, or an exclusive Final Fantasy title).

    2. Re:Where should they go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Hong Kong is no longer an option, the next logical choice is often Panama's Colon Free Trade Zone.

  43. WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Strategery...

    sony mgmt & the art of shit-crapping-ur-brand-image...


    Furthermore, Sony have failed to disclose to the London High Court that not only the world wide gaming community in more than 100 countries relied on Lik-Sang for their gaming needs, but also Sony Europe's very own top directors repeatedly got their Sony PSP hard or software imports in nicely packed Lik-Sang parcels with free Lik-Sang Mugs or Lik-Sang Badge Holders, starting just two days after Japan's official release, as early as 14th of December 2004 (more than nine months earlier than the legal action). The list of PSP related Sony Europe orders reads like the who's who of the videogames industry, and includes Ray Maguire (Managing Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd), Alan Duncan (UK Marketing Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd), Chris Sorrell (Creative Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd), Rob Parkin (Development Director, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Limited), just to name a few.


    IANAMBA
  44. Shame on Sony for protecting peoples IP... by King_of_Crunk · · Score: 1

    You make it sound as if all they did was sell "official" Playstation products. Sony's problem with this outfit stems way back and was mainly centered around products sold which enabled pirated versions of their games to be played on their systems.

    Now seriously say you are a software developer which I am sure some of you are and you have a retail outlet selling one of your products. Along with that product sits another product which cercumvents the licensing of the product your selling as well as the licensing of most everyone elses software. Sure they are selling your software but honestly when atleast the majority of the customers to that retail store are going there to purchase the item used to run your software for free what diffrence does it make that they sell your software as well.

    Lets face it people Lik-Sang made their name selling items used mainly to pirate games for consoles and are now hiding behind the fact that they then sold a few PSP's. I guarentee you Sony did not fight Lik-Sang just because they sold PSP's and to flame a company for protecting their's as well as other's intelectual property well...

    1. Re:Shame on Sony for protecting peoples IP... by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      That might have been their beef, but they killed Lik-Sang FOR selling their product. The lawsuits are about the PSP's not about ther other stuff, thats what Sony is suing them for. Lik-sang aint hiding behind anything, this is flat out what Sony is killing them for. And its Britians courts that are letting them do it by actually buying into the argument that by selling directly to Europe they bypassed safety issues, when the PSP sold in Europe is the EXACT SAME THING.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    2. Re:Shame on Sony for protecting peoples IP... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding? Did you ever even visit their site? That vast majority of the products they had available had NOTHING to do with piracy. Nothing. Most people went to there to buy import games, import systems, and other accessories. For example, that's all I ever purchased there... a couple of DS carrying cases, a USB -> XBox adapter, component video switch, etc... I never once purchased anything related to piracy. I think you are dead wrong that most people just purchased products related to piracy.

    3. Re:Shame on Sony for protecting peoples IP... by vonPoonBurGer · · Score: 1

      'You make it sound as if all they did was sell "official" Playstation products.'

      In the context of this latest series of lawsuits, that *is* all they did! They sold official, unmodified asian-region PSPs in Europe. They haven't sold modchips or GBA flash carts since 2002, and had successfully rebuilt themselves since that time as a merchant of imported titles and hard-to-find accessories. It's all on the wiki:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lik_Sang

      'I guarentee you Sony did not fight Lik-Sang just because they sold PSP's and to flame a company for protecting their's as well as other's intelectual property well...'

      I'm sorry, but that's exactly what the lawsuit was about. Lik-Sang wasn't infringing Sony's intellectual property in any sense that the vast majority of consumers would consider meaningful. They weren't making copies of their games, they weren't modifying consoles to allow pirated copies to play, they weren't selling gear to allow for such modification. What they *were* doing was allowing European customers to circumvent Sony's regional distribution. The primary reason Sony releases consoles, games and movies separately in Europe is because it allows them to charge more for them. If you're trying to tell me Sony is a righteous crusader for intellectual property protection because they get foreign courts to uphold their regional price gouging tactics, I'm sorry, but you're simply delusional.

    4. Re:Shame on Sony for protecting peoples IP... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Heay Genuis....

      Here's the court battle to which you refer, where Sony bled Lik Sang for untold legal fees fighting the case and Lik Sang ultimately had to resort to paying Sony an untold some of $$$ in a settlement to finally drop the ongoing legal attack...

      And and here's the link to a completed court battle showing that that Sony's lawsuit was LEGALLY WRONG, that Lik Sang was in the right and their business was perfectly legal, and that Sony had bled Lik Sang of all those the legal fees and extorted the settlement money out of Lik Sang with an invalid lawsuit.

      products sold which enabled pirated

      1984 is calling, and it wants it's piracy-products junk arguments back.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:Shame on Sony for protecting peoples IP... by King_of_Crunk · · Score: 1

      If you can't beat them one waty you beat them another way.



      Everyone knows "Genius" that Sony has been looking for a way to shut down Lik Sang due to the mod's and so on that they sell NOT the fact they sold official Playstation gear. If you belive the only reason Sony went after Lik Sang was because they sold a few PSP's then you honestly have no clue what the war was between these two buisnesses was about. Read back on history not just the FUD you read on /.



      Sorry to sound like a troll but understand and read into the whole picture not just a single post.



      This was the one way they were able to successfully shut them down.

    6. Re:Shame on Sony for protecting peoples IP... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      I don't see anything in your latest post that I substantially disagree with.

      Hopefully that grabbed your attention. It clearly shows that one of us is missing something or missunderstanding something. Obviously I think that someone would be you in this case, chuckle. I read everything in your last post and beleive I understand everything you said and everything you meant in that last post, and I basically agree with it all. As far as I can tell there is not a single point in your latest post where you disagree with anything I said. As far as I can tell you either did not read my last post, or did not understand my last post.

      You latest post merely serves to admit that Sony is engaging in vexatious litigation, and that Lik Sang is the victim of that vexatious litigation.

      Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  45. Conveniently copy-pastable letter of protest : by Hitto · · Score: 1

    "Hello sony,

    It has come to my attention that your legal attacks against the online retailer lik-sang.com has lead to its closure. I had supported this retailer in the past, and some of their items lead me to purchase more sony products.

    Due to your unethical legal attacks on them, I have decided to boycott your company. I have been a gamer for my entire life, so this is no small commitment.

    I look forward to the games of your competitors, and hope you fail."

    I'm not going to hand out any contact info, you guys are smart enough to google it.

    1. Re:Conveniently copy-pastable letter of protest : by tehwebguy · · Score: 1
      --
      -- lol pwned
    2. Re:Conveniently copy-pastable letter of protest : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yay my copypasta is on the slashdot too. wherever shall i find it next

    3. Re:Conveniently copy-pastable letter of protest : by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      What about a simple "Dear Sony: FUCK OFF AND DIE!"?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  46. Kill Sony, buy a PS3! by Penguin's+Advocate · · Score: 1

    If you really want to hurt sony, go out and purchase the expensive version of the PS3! If you do that, and then don't buy any of their games, movies, cd's, etc, they might actually go out of business. (I admit I will have a hard time not buying games... but Sony has made me sad, and I see now that they really do need to be taken down a few notches)

    --
    Frag 'em all...
    1. Re:Kill Sony, buy a PS3! by ImaNumber · · Score: 1

      You are better off NOT buying a PS3.

      If they sell 1 million PS3's with no games they will lose money, but if they sell 0 PS3's with no games they will lose about 600 million $ more....

    2. Re:Kill Sony, buy a PS3! by PeteDotNu · · Score: 1

      Nice try, but that's the exact reason why Sony are going to deliberately limit the number of PS3 consoles available at launch. They know that if they sell too many consoles immediately, they will go bust. From their point of view, it is better to let them trickle out while the cost of components drops.

      The best way to hurt Sony would be to tell the truth. Spread the word about what they have been doing. No tricks or ploys required.

      --
      My other processor is big-endian.
    3. Re:Kill Sony, buy a PS3! by iainl · · Score: 1

      Until they killed Lik-Sang, I was indeed toying with the idea of purchasing a PS3 at what is a loss to Sony. However, this means I can no longer buy the Japanese model that costs almost exactly half of what SCEE are eventually charging in the UK directly. Cunts.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    4. Re:Kill Sony, buy a PS3! by Jasin+Natael · · Score: 1

      That's all well and good, but unless you can get pirated PS3 games, you've just spent far more than Sony's loss, and stuck yourself with an overhyped piece of junk with no actual utility.

      --
      True science means that when you re-evaluate the evidence, you re-evaluate your faith.
  47. I'm goin' home! *tantrum* by Mortanius · · Score: 1

    Flamebait me if you will, but it sounds to me that Lik-Sang is going the crybaby route and taking their toys and going home, hoping that people will, as have already on slashdot, go for the zomg boycott sony!@# approach.

    Well played.

    1. Re:I'm goin' home! *tantrum* by revlayle · · Score: 1

      Well, they are stopping now... so they can refund as many orders, pre-orders, credit accounts, and *MAYBE* have a bit left for a severance for the employees they have. if they started throwing money at a lawsuit defense and drained their reserves, then there would be even a more angry customer base. and of course lik-sang wants consumers to rally around them, they are a CUSTOMER BASED BUSINESS DUH!

    2. Re:I'm goin' home! *tantrum* by siegesama · · Score: 1

      You're projecting your own attitude onto them. They're refunding orders like a responsible company (while they still can, before being sued into oblivion). Their future would consist almost entirely of lawsuits based on this precedent.

      Also, powerful vanity on your part as a member of the "slashdot crowd" to believe that a profitable company would go out of business just to get an emotional response from you.

      --
      what the hell is a 'junk character', anyway?
    3. Re:I'm goin' home! *tantrum* by Mortanius · · Score: 1

      Kudos to them for being the good business people that they are and refunding orders and settling store credit and so forth.

      But it seems to me that given the business they're in, you'd expect at least a bit more of a bark back from them while making these arrangements, rather than a quick and quiet whimper as they back out the door. Mind you, you're right, without serious financial backing there's not a lot they can do (and whether they have legal backing anyway would be a question as well) but it would seem like there's perhaps a pretty vocal crowd over in Europe that would love to take a swing or two at Sony (moreso than has been already.)

      With the courts in the EU loving to interfere with business as they do, I'm a little surprised they sided with such a large corporation. But then, they aren't Microsoft, I guess.

    4. Re:I'm goin' home! *tantrum* by Alsee · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps you were unaware that Sony has spent the last few years having their legal department bleed Lik Sang dry with lawsuits in a multitude of countries?

      Like this case in Australia where Sony bled Lik Sang of untold legal fees and finally pressured Lik Sang to pay Sony undisclosed $$$ in order to drop the assault, and this completed battle over the issue showing that Lik Sang was in the right and their business was perfectly legal, and that Sony had bled Lik Sang of all that money with an INVALID lawsuit?

      Sony is the Bad Guy here directing their international legal staff to wage an ongoing international legal assault, and tiny Lik Sang is the hero here for managing to fight the good fight against a vexatious litigant for as long as they did, with Sony filing god-knows how many different lawsuits in god-knows how many different countries and eventually bleeding Lik Sang to death.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:I'm goin' home! *tantrum* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess MS or Nintendo had nothing to do with them losing any money as well. Nintendo has had them on their hitlist for years.

    6. Re:I'm goin' home! *tantrum* by Builder · · Score: 1

      I can't flamebait you coz I don't have modpoints, so I'll reply instead.

      The real problem here for Lik-sang is that precedent has been set. This means that now Sony can sue them for selling Japanese X-boxes to the UK. Nintendo could sue them for selling the Wii to the UK.

      Lawsuits aren't cheap - I'm sure if you offered to fund all future lawsuits that are brought against them, they'd be happy to stay open. No? didn't think so.

  48. buy used by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure someone else already said this, but it's probably still fine to buy used.

  49. Remember this by Varitek · · Score: 1

    Remember this when some big corporation starts whining about government regulation of the market. They don't want a free market. They want government regulation that favours them.

    1. Re:Remember this by Ruud+Althuizen · · Score: 1

      Now where did I leave my LART bat again?

      --
      **TODO** Steal someone elses sig.
  50. pirates on the open water by toy4two · · Score: 1

    come on this company was more a target for their Playstation disc verification bypass products more than the importing of games. I remember when they sold PS2 mod chips and swap discs. There are plenty of other importing companies, these guys got singled out because they were selling "backup devices". I hate SONY as much as the next guy, but they do have to protect their intellectual property.

  51. Sony is hurting the World by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sony is hurting the World. They attack international trade and force the underdogs like Lik-Sang to close shop and go home. They push DRM and deny us access to what we have purchased. They push DRM on us, forcing us to buy the same content many times on different media.

    Consider a typical Sony gaming console, the PSP. It's a very nice portable computer, but you can only use it to run Sony-approved software. When people liberate the firmware by hacking it, Sony releases a new firmware version that closes up the hardware again. Sony game consoles are the embodiment of DRM, of restricted hardware that has no master but Sony. You may have paid for it, but you don't own it. You can only use it for Sony-approved uses, even though it is capable of so much more.

    It's all fun and games until you realize that Sony employs vast hordes of high-paid lobbyists to influence legislation across the world, and uses the courts and law enforcement to do its bidding. Sony has helped to create a legal environment under which you can be punished for selling one of their consoles without authorization, or liberating that console so that it can run the software of your choice.

    Sony is actively trying to change laws and to harass those who would go against Sony. We must not stand for this.

    Sony makes great products, and great entertainment, but because of their despicable actions, we are justified in pirating it without qualms.

    Let us pirate Sony's content, let us hack their hardware and subvert it to our will!

    Down with Sony! Up with Piracy!

  52. Alternatively, fail to pay Sony by Heffenfeffer · · Score: 2, Insightful
    While I don't particularly care for Sony, there's no reason to deprive yourself of their entertainment properties solely to prove a point.

    It's possible to enjoy all of these without paying Sony for the privelge:

    Playstation stuff - It's debatable about whether or not the hardware for the PS3 is a loss leader - thus, purchasing it may actually hurt Sony financially. To top it off, if you sell one on eBay this Christmas for a higher price, you would then make money at Sony's expense.

    Alternatively, you could simply purchase all Playstation products (including the PS3 once there are ample supplies) used. Since Sony only makes money for the first sale of each property, you can rest assured that Sony won't make any money on your purchases. Or rent games from video stores or Gamefly.

    Movies - Essentally the same as video games, simply rent the DVD once the movie leaves theaters or buy it used.

    TV shows - Unless you're part of a Nielsen family, it makes no difference to Sony whether you watch their show or not. The TV show was already purchased by the TV station with money from the advertisers. If you feel you must do something, then either ask your local TV station to stop running said shows (Good Luck there - "I feel that since Sony shut down a game importing company it is morally reprehensible for you to show "The Boondocks.") or mute the ads and/or don't purchase any products that are advertised during said shows (this may prove diffcult, though - can you honestly stop going to your favorite local hot dog stand solely because one of their ads happened to run during Jeopardy! ?) Alternatively, wait for the series to be printed on DVDs, and then rent/buy used.

    So...yeah. By doing these things, I'm contributing exactly as much money to Sony as the above poster while still watching shows I like.

    1. Re:Alternatively, fail to pay Sony by typobox43 · · Score: 1

      If you sell the PS3 on eBay, it'll likely go to someone who'll be plenty willing to buy enough games to counteract whatever loss Sony takes on the console sale. Not gaining much there.

    2. Re:Alternatively, fail to pay Sony by Kimos · · Score: 1
      It's possible to enjoy all of these without paying Sony for the privelge:
      Unfortunately, that's not the case. Just because you're not paying them directly, doesn't mean that they don't indirectly benefit.
      • Buy a PS3 and sell it, well then someone else will be using it and buying games etc. from Sony
      • Buying a used PS3 is still taking one more console off the market, possibly indirectly causing someone else to buy a new one. Then you're still buying games and accessories which follows the same pattern. You buy game X, someone else has to buy it new.
      • Renting movies and games? Because the video store doesn't have to buy copies to start with (at a much higher cost than you or I buy it for because of rental licensing). Plus, the quantity they buy is based on how many of them get rented.
      • TV shows are a rough call, but if you're watching them you're still watching the ads. Weather you know it or not, that's all they need.
      • Same deal with buying used DVDs
      Best way is to contact the artists for CDs. Tell them that you're sad you can't support them because of their distributor. I've done that and had the artist respond to me directly. Once even got a copy of his master burned to CD-RW.

      Oh, and buy a Wii.
  53. part of the risk of the grey market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was a grey market importer. It's an interesting business to be in. There are two reasons for the grey market: either to bring in a product that is not marketed in the destination country, or to take advantage of arbitrage when the product is available but the official importer adds a hefty premium.

    Either way, you will eventually attract hostile attention, especially if you undercut the official importer (either by lower prices or earlier market presence). Your best strategy is to fly under the radar; that is, be too small a fry and ideally be in a market that is entirely neglected.

    In Lik-Sang's case, they had a history of selling mod-chips (which according to some is black market rather than grey market) and they were undercutting the official importer. They also marketed in the UK, which has much more hostile laws to the grey market than the USA.

    It is much harder to suppress the grey market in the USA via the courts. Believe me, they tried. It was quite a fight for a while, but eventually the grey market won.

    Yet, the grey market is much less active in the USA. This is because the producers came to understand that the only way to drive the grey marketeers out of business in the USA was to compete with them on a level playing field; that is, to offer an official (and hence supported) USA version of the product at a competitive price.

    To tell you the truth, I didn't mind being shut down. I am a consumer as well as a(n ex-)grey marketeer. The official importer undercut not only my price but the price that I paid overseas, and had a more suitable product for the USA market. Ultimately, my grey market activities were to help sponsor my overseas shopping trips, as opposed to being an income-producing business; and the official importer made that unnecessary.

    The success of the grey market also helped convince the producers that there was a market in the USA for their product. That probably would not have happened if it weren't for us.

    So, in the end, everybody won in the USA by not suppressing the grey market through the courts. Too bad that the UK government isn't as wise.

    1. Re:part of the risk of the grey market by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The success of the grey market also helped convince the producers that there was a market in the USA for their product. That probably would not have happened if it weren't for us.

      So, in the end, everybody won in the USA by not suppressing the grey market through the courts. Too bad that the UK government isn't as wise.


      Well, as much as we all love to complain about the US government, the UK government is actually far more idiotic. We're talking about a country where there's thousands of video cameras in public places watching everyone, muggings are a common occurrence, crime victims are expressly forbidden from defending themselves, even in their own homes, and the government is about to ban knives with sharp points.

      As much as I like to complain about the US sometimes, it's orders of magnitude better than living in the UK.

  54. Re:BOYCOTT THE LEGAL SYSTEM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Sony actually had a case and won the juridical trial, shouldn't you boicott the legal system as well?

    OT : I remember a few years ago when Nintendo dragged Lik-Sang to court, making them stop selling flash devices (aka : hardware pirate devices) - guess Lik-Sang took a hit back then too ...

  55. Re:Two words for sony by QuantaStarFire · · Score: 1

    Which will explode due to shoddy manufacturing.

  56. Sony or the Legal System? by NoData · · Score: 1


    Should the blame here rest mainly with Sony, and other corporations who exploit their deep pockets to manipulate the legal system for their mercenary tactics--or should we blame the bollocksed legal systems (in this case, Britain's) that allow them to do so?

  57. Makes me want to buy an xbox360 by Oz0ne · · Score: 1

    I hadn't honestly even considered it before, but I don't understand this lawsuit at all, it seems to be pure spite.

    1. Re:Makes me want to buy an xbox360 by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      You're better off buying a Wii, since Microsoft is just as bad. (Of course, so was Nintendo back in the day... I'm not sure if it's improved enough or not.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  58. The arrogance of assumed power. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    The only thing I've bought from Sony recently (within the past 3 years) is a MiniDV camcorder. I thought "no way they can possibly fuck that up," right? I mean, it's a standard format.

    Well, they tried; it uses the most bizarre power cord design I've ever seen. Sure, they could have used a regular barrel-and-pin connector like everyone else in the world does, but no. They have to go with this hideous E-shaped abortion of a plug, which only works with Sony gear and of course isn't compatible with generic DC converters and whatnot.

    I also noticed that on the new "Minolta" cameras (Sony A100), they've gone the same route. Pity Konica didn't sell the Minolta division out to Panasonic instead.

    I can sum up Sony in one word: control.

    They want to control everything. Any opportunity they have to own a particular niche or distribution channel, even if it's something as dumb as power adaptors, they'll take. Even when it's control that any rational person would agree they have no right to have (say, over your computer), they try to take it. The issue with Lik-Sang is similar; Lik-Sang challenged Sony's absolute, iron-fisted control over product distribution, and Sony destroyed them for it. There are really few companies who can compete with Sony in terms of arrogance and disrespect for their customers.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:The arrogance of assumed power. by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I can sum up Sony in one word: control.

      There are really few companies who can compete with Sony in terms of arrogance and disrespect for their customers.

      In other words, Sony is exactly like Microsoft.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  59. Corporate capital is free, people are not by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    Yes, the WTO is designed to smash up "local" consumer-friendly regulations and propogate "global" corporation-friendly regulations. It helps corporations shift capital spending freely between countries and chase low labor costs and wimpy environmental protections, but there's no similar provision for individual freedom of movement.

    In other words, a large part of what maintains the low labor costs is the fact that its legally hard for people stuck in most third-world countries to just pick up and move to a better country.

    What's this have to do with Sony's "regional distribution?" If you were a company, it might be frowned on by the WTO, but because you are a lowly biped, you get nothing except a reminder to please stay in your own country and await further orders.

  60. Not really... by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Informative

    The lawsuit in question wasn't about infringement enabling devices (read: modchips...). It was about selling PSP's to the UK without Sony's permission. Completely different thing altogether.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  61. That sealed it for me by falcon5768 · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Im not buying a PS3 or PSP simply on principle now even if it did go down on price.

    I am so sick of that company saying your not a gamer unless you conform to THEIR idea of a gamer.

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    1. Re:That sealed it for me by Shados · · Score: 1

      How is this a troll? People get modded insightful 5 for saying the same darn thing about Microsoft everyday.

  62. Reasons to hate sony by lusid1 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    A few resons to hate Sony. Please reply with anything I may have missed.

    Forcing Lik-Sang out of business
    Selling Root-Kit infected music CDs
    Their contribution to the HD DVD format war
    Harrassing Bleem at gaming industry trade shows
    The ensuing Bleem bloodbath, and Bleem's eventual demise
    Fatal mismanagement of the UMD movie format
    The constant war against PSP homebrew developers
    Their inability to accept and support industry standard digital media formats
    The Sony Memory Stick (when MMC/SD were better,chaper,faster)
    The Sony Memory Stick Pro Duo (SD is still better,chaper,faster)
    The Sony Network Walkman, better known as the MP3 player that doesn't support MP3
    The ATRAC3 compression algorithm
    The Sony Mini-Disc format
    Fatal mismanagement of the Sony Mini-Disc format
    The VHS-Beta format war
    The Betamax format

    1. Re:Reasons to hate sony by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1
      Invading Poland in 1939...

      Oops! Sorry, "Sony"... I thought you said "Nazis"... Sorry about that....

      Ah, what the hell! Same difference, leave that one in.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    2. Re:Reasons to hate sony by lusid1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I almost forgot:

      Exploding Laptop Batteries forcing recalls by Dell, Apple, Toshiba, Lenovo, and Fujitsu

  63. Time to change the laws by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

    Currently, vendors have the right to limit distribution to a certain region. It is time to change copyright law in that regard and strengthen the rights of the end users.

    AFAIK that has already happened within the EU, at least car makers have already be fined for trying to prevent re-imports from other EU states. Not that it will help the brits much in this case:
    Since they are the only large english-speaking country in the EU, buying from France or Germany won't help them to get cheaper english versions of their games.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
    1. Re:Time to change the laws by Chainsaw · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the rest of the EU, but games bought in Sweden are english. It's our second language, taught from third grade or so, which makes it rather logical. Some games offers a language choice: english, french, german or spanish. Aren't all games like this? Information from residents in .de, .fr and .es would be interesting.

      --
      War is one of the most horrible things a human can be exposed to. And one of the worlds largest industries.
    2. Re:Time to change the laws by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      Currently, vendors have the right to limit distribution to a certain region.

      No, they don't. Property law includes something called the "doctrine of first sale." What this means is that once Lik-Sang buys the PSPs, it can do whatever it wants with them -- play games on them, sell them locally, burn them, use them for skeet shooting, and most relevantly, sell them internationally. And Sony can't (or rather, shouldn't have been able to) do a damn thing about it.

      What Sony did was trick the judge by telling him some bullshit about the imported PSPs being unsafe because they hadn't been tested in the UK (despite the fact that they would have been identical to the ones Sony was importing itself). The judge then ruled against Lik-Sang based on "consumer protection" laws (that in this case did the opposite of protecting the consumer).

      In other words, it should have been about property law, and an open-and-shut case in favor of Lik-Sang, but it wasn't.

      It is time to change copyright law in that regard and strengthen the rights of the end users.

      Copyright law has absolutely nothing to do with this. The PSP (which is what the lawsuit was about is a physical product, and as such operates (or rather, is supposed to operate) according to normal property law.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Time to change the laws by Dravik · · Score: 1

      Sony did us unethical and untrue arguments in this case but the doctrine of first sale doesn't apply here. If I buy a chair from you then the doctrine of first sale applies. But you also have the right to refuse to sell me your chair. Now if I really want your chair I can restrict my own rights as a way to convince you to sell me your chair. If you only want that chair to be in a yellow painte room and only wanted it used by people with purple hair you can demand that as a condition of your release of the chair. If I agree to your demands and document that agreement in a legal way, a written contract, then I am liable if I don't follow that agreement. You would have the right to refuse to sell me any more of what you own and to sue me for breaching the contract.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    4. Re:Time to change the laws by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Few console games have only one language on the disc (unless that language is English), almost every console game bought e.g. in Germany can be set to display everything in English. Voice acting isn't translated anyway, apparently five months between the US and EU release is not enough to do that.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:Time to change the laws by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Okay, so the doctrine of first sale can be superseded by a contract... then show me the contract that's involved here (hint: I'm pretty sure there isn't one)! I reiterate: because there was no contract, Sony had absolutely no grounds to sue, and the judge fucked up by falling for Sony's trick.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:Time to change the laws by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      Retailers buying products from suppliers tend to have contracts with said suppliers, based around terms of sale, cuts of the profits, when the products can be sold, where, who to... It's just a done thing.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    7. Re:Time to change the laws by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      So what? Even if a contract existed, it was not involved in this particular lawsuit. Read the article. Look for any mention of a contract. You're not going to find one.

      Here's a quote from :

      Sony declined to comment directly on the case. However, a spokesperson did tell GI.biz: "The law is clear; grey importing PS2, PSP or PS3 into the EU, without the express permission of SCE is illegal. Therefore, we will utilise the full scope of the law to put a stop to any retailers who chose to do this."

      He continued, "Ultimately, we're trying to protect consumers from being sold hardware that does not conform to strict EU or UK consumer safety standards, due to voltage supply differences et cetera; is not - in PS3's case - backwards compatible with either PS1 or PS2 software; will not play European Blu-Ray movies or DVDs; and will not be covered by warranty."

      Forgive me if I don't trust the Sony spokesman's interpretation of "the law," considering that everything else he said was a blatant lie. That idea's simply too fucking absurd to be a law -- even if Sony does have trademarks on the PSP (obviously it does), by selling it to Lik Sang -- or anyone -- the doctrine of first sale says that it's given the buyer permission to redistribute that instance of the trademark. This blatant stupidity (the lawsuit, that is) is certainly consistent with Sony's Bizarro-world view of economics (and the same rationale that's behind DRM), but it's completely divorced from reality.

      Think, for a second, about what life would be like if everything worked like this: you buy a Ford car, but don't get the right to redistribute the emblems etc. on it. What happens when you want to trade it in? You can't! Why? Because selling it would include selling the blue oval badges too, and that's a no-no. Next, what happens when it finally dies completely, and you want to have it hauled off to the junkyard? You can't! Why? Because even if no money is exchanged, you're still trying to transfer ownership of the damn decals! Now, is that a world you'd want to live in? Does the idea of it even make sense?!

      Come to think of it, Lik Sang is the least of our worries! If this kind of shit doesn't get stopped, the concept of real property (as opposed to the fake -- I mean, "intellectual" variety) will be completely destroyed. Somebody needs to smack the judge (and all the other judges that have committed stupidity regarding EULAs and such) with a clue-by-four before it's too late!

      Besides, even if it was a contract dispute, completely barring Lik Sang's sale of an item in that country is not a reasonable remedy. At most, Sony could be awarded monetary damages, and the contract could be rendered void (forcing Lik Sang to buy future Sony products at full retail, or from another middleman).

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    8. Re:Time to change the laws by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      Sony didn't trick the judge. This is all about the EU Trademarks Directive, which also prevented Tesco from selling cheap "grey import" Levi's jeans a few years ago.

      It's basically a barrier to free trade.

      The "safety" stuff was just a load of flannel because Sony didn't want to tell the public that the reason for doing it was to allow for market segmentation.

    9. Re:Time to change the laws by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      Sorry for the late answer, but according to the German IT-newsticker at www.heise.de Sony did indeed use copyright arguments. Unfortunately they gave not many details. Unauthorized publishing of the PSP manual was mentioned, but that is the only in-depth information.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
  64. No but by Solr_Flare · · Score: 1

    No, it didn't, but they can't afford to deal with the lawsuits and pressure being applied by Sony towards them. So, even though this was only a portion of their business, the pressure is enough to force them to close down.

    --
    You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
  65. Re: "Does not conform to CD Audio...." by Name+Anonymous · · Score: 1
    below the sticker that read "this CD does not conform to CD Audio specifications and may not play in all CD players"

    This is an indication that there is in all probability some sort of copy protection on the CD. It's a downcheck on the CD and means I for one will not be buying it...

  66. R.I.P. Lik-Sang by Bones3D_mac · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Too bad to see such a good company go. I've checked their site regularly for years to look for interesting items I could use with my curent gaming hardware, such as the Japan-only Nintendo DS web browser. I'm sure someone else will eventually take Lik-Sang's place, but no one will ever have such detailed information about foreign products like Lik-Sang offered.

    --


    8==8 Bones 8==8
    1. Re:R.I.P. Lik-Sang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Opera Software released their browser for the DS in Europe in the beginning of October.

      Have a nice day ^-^

    2. Re:R.I.P. Lik-Sang by CmSpuD · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't know Lik-Sang too well myself, but this might go a little way towards replacing them - http://www.play-asia.com/ They've still got some Dreamcast stuff, heh.. 3

  67. DAMNIT TO FUCKING HELL!!!! by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sorry, I had to say it. That is all.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    1. Re:DAMNIT TO FUCKING HELL!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. You and me both, man. Once I finished reading slashdot today, I was going right over to lik-sang.com to order me a new dreamcast serial cable. My old one died during this last move, and I was wanting to back up my VMU saves and try some of the latest homebrew stuff that I missed while moving, and I find out my old coder's cable is no more.
        Now I find Lik-Sang is closing its doors, too! Dammit. Well, maybe someone will start building and selling those awesome USB coder's cables that someone designed. They're supposed to be nearly as comparable to a broadband adapter, but I'll be damned if I could build one. The specs are nice, but I can't solder for crap.

  68. Well, which is it? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    If I absolutely positively must have any of its media(games movies cds etc) or electronics products i'll either warez it or buy it second hand.

    Come on, now. If you're actually taking this position on principle, how can you even talk about absolutely positively "must having" a game?

    It's one thing to grumble if, say, your employer requires you to use a Sony product (batteries?). But you never, ever, "need" entertainment. By pretending that you're going to somehow teach them some lesson by ripping off their media products, you're just not admitting that your desire for their entertainer's handiwork is still stronger than your loathing of them as a business. Well, which is it? Ripping them off still increases the demand for their products. It maintains buzz, visibility, and the notion that even people who can't afford to buy their own entertainment are willing to break the law to have Sony products. If you really don't like them, just walk away. Completely. Only that will teach them a lesson.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Well, which is it? by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1
      You'll still have Sony batteries because they're one of the few manufacturers that actually make the things in the specialized shape that Dell, Toshiba and Apple need. It's not cheap process to set up - more like extremely expensive - so there's not many manufacturers that are lined up waiting to take Sony's business. Which means that you're going to be using Sony batteries for some time to come.

      If one is truly committed to never using Sony, one could, I guess carry around a car battery and an inverter...

    2. Re:Well, which is it? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Which means that you're going to be using Sony batteries for some time to come.

      Hopefully you still get my point. Laptop batteries are not the same as goof-off-time entertainment products (or TVs, for that matter).

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Well, which is it? by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1
      I do. But, realistically, you aren't going to have much choice as to who makes the batteries in your laptop if there is only one supplier.

      Someone from Intel once told me that they knew exactly how many keyboards that there were because Intel was the only supplier. Nobody else wanted to get into the business because it was too costly to ramp up production for such a low-margin item. Even though batteries are a more expensive item than a single chip, the situation is much the same here. One could ask Dell or Apple all they want to look for another battery supplier, but unless or until there's enough money in it for someone to make them or people would be willing to pay a higher price for a short time to, in effect, subsidize a new manufacturer's development, choices will be limited.

      On a related note, Sony makes a lot of items for other manufacturers. The CCD for Nikon's DSLR cameras, I understand, are made by Sony. If you look under the cover, I think you'll find that a lot of LCD screens are made by Sony. Are we to extend the boycott to them, too? Are we also to boycott Carl Zeiss because they make optics for some Sony cameras?

    4. Re:Well, which is it? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Are we to extend the boycott to them, too? Are we also to boycott Carl Zeiss because they make optics for some Sony cameras?

      We're on the same page, here, and you're actually helping to make my point... which (in response to the "they're not getting any more of my money, I'll just warez their stuff" guy) was to point out that he's going to have to do some REAL walking away from Sony if he means it. And it's difficult, as you point out. His "threat" to just rip off, rather than pay for, his entertainment is pretty empty, really - and says more about his looking for an excuse to rip off the artists that Sony happens to represent than it does some real (meaningful) effort on his part to harm Sony in any way that matters.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:Well, which is it? by miro+f · · Score: 1

      try buying a different brand of laptop then. There are plenty of other brands that don't use Sony batteries

      I have a Samsung laptop and it's been fantastic to me.

      --
      being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
  69. Lik-Sang stopped selling mod chips years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason I can see for Sony to sue them is if they're somehow making less money by selling PSPs to Lik-Sang who sells them to the UK, than if they sell them to the UK.

    As an aside: Did Sony go through a major change in leadership recently? They didn't always seem this anti-social.

  70. Just what did they do anyway? by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Funny

    What did they do anyway that was so illegal or wrong?

    AFAICT, Lik Sang bought goods in one place, thereby invoking "Exhaustion of Rights" -- i.e., the law which says that once you have sold something that used to have been your property once to somebody else, whatever the hell they do with it next is none of your bloody business -- and sold the same goods in another place. What's so terrible about that? For crying out loud, there are laws in place that protect your right to do exactly that! For instance, on the European Mainland, DVD players must be multi-region; because it has been ruled by the European courts that preventing a movie sold in one country from being watched in another is anti-competitive behaviour. How is this not the case with video games? Or is this another bit of the Maastricht Treaty that John Major opted us out of while he was Prime Minister?

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    1. Re:Just what did they do anyway? by Compulawyer · · Score: 1

      That is not the way exhaustion doctrine works. The event that exhausts the rights must occur (or be deemed to occur) within the geographic area within which the rights to be exhausted exist. That means of you buy a patented product in area 1, you cannot import that product into area 2 if area 2 has granted a patent because importing is an act of patent infringement. You have not exhausted the patent rights granted by area 2 by buying the product in area 1.

      --

      Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.

    2. Re:Just what did they do anyway? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What did they do anyway that was so illegal or wrong?

      I don't know about EU law, but US law makes it illegal to import trademarked items (even if they are real) for resale without the trademark owner's (written) permission 0 if the owner is a US citizen or corporation. In effect, corporations with US operations can limit the gray market importation of their products if they have a US subsidiary. There are personal use exemptions - i.e. I can buy a Rolex in Switzerland and bring it to the US; since Congress amended the law to allow for personal use exemptions after they discovered that people were buying things overseas for their own us only to be faced with customs seizure when they got back.

      In effect, it protects the US company's ability to exclusively market their goods - whether or not that is a good thing is a different story. Of course, the US sub is glad to sell as much of its product to tourists or whomever and let the other region's distributes worry about their lost sales.

      Of course, companies can limit the profitability of the gray market by minimizing price differences around the world, although currency fluctuations will always open up arbitrage opportunities; and selling products widely instead of limiting some to specific regions. They also try to limit it by not offering world wide warranties; or, in the case of some car manufacturers, requiring you to agree to not export the vehicle within a certain amount of time after purchase.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    3. Re:Just what did they do anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      although currency fluctuations will always open up arbitrage opportunities
      And that only shows how fucked up our money system is. That besides Sony.

    4. Re:Just what did they do anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The personal-use exemption is a loophole big enough to drive a truck through, and every grey marketer knows it. Even counterfeit goods can be imported under the personal-use exemption.

      When push comes to shove, the US law is effective only against grey marketeers who resell counterfeit goods. It is effectively impossible to pursue a case against grey marketeers who import and resell authentic goods, legitimately purchased overseas. They tried (it was a big foofaraw about 20 years ago) and they lost.

    5. Re:Just what did they do anyway? by swordfishBob · · Score: 1

      Australian law explicitly allows and defends parallel imports. That seems to work ok in some areas, but there are still some limited markets where retailers are too scared of pissing off the major importer to go around them. (e.g. musical instruments & accessories - digitech GNX4 costs twice as much here as in USA).

      --
      -- All your bass are below two Hz
    6. Re:Just what did they do anyway? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      although currency fluctuations will always open up arbitrage opportunities

      And that only shows how fucked up our money system is. That besides Sony.


      Not really - prices can't adjust as fast as currency value swings, nor is it really necessary they do - especially for domestic goods.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    7. Re:Just what did they do anyway? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      When push comes to shove, the US law is effective only against grey marketeers who resell counterfeit goods. It is effectively impossible to pursue a case against grey marketeers who import and resell authentic goods, legitimately purchased overseas. They tried (it was a big foofaraw about 20 years ago) and they lost.

      I believe what you are referring to is when there is common ownership between the US company and the foreign one - in that case grey market importation is OK because to prohibit would allow the manufacturer to maintain price differentials and give them too much market power. US law also allows companies to prevent the import of products with material differences - which is why foreign Cabbage Patch Dolls were not allowed to be imported. Original Appalachian Artworks won that case; as did Dial Corp against a reimporter of their soap.

      As with most laws regarding commercial activities there is no clear cut answer.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  71. What? Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by Nananine · · Score: 1

    It doesn't make any sense... why would you call for a boycott of Sony from the people who wanted Sony products so much they imported them early?

    1. Re:What? Re:BOYCOTT SONY! by twistedsymphony · · Score: 1

      Theoretically it's more effective if their consumers are the ones who stop buying their products as opposed to people who didn't previously buy their products.

  72. Well, Crap. by ewhac · · Score: 1
    When the resources became available, I was going to buy one of those SD card media players/storage devices for the Nintendo DS Lite. Evidently it's one of the easiest ways to do homebrew development on the DS.

    They almost have this on the shelves at Fry's -- a MediaMax cartridge with a built-in 4 gig drive. But that's a little costly at $150.00. The SD card reader version was considerably cheaper, but apparently was only (easily) available through Lik-Sang. Well, now that they're dead, I don't know how I'm going to obtain one at all, much less at a fair price.

    In a previous life, I did some development on the Nintendo GBA. We obtained the compatible FLASH carts and programmers from Lik-Sang and got some interesting prototypes running. The Nintendo DS is an insanely cute little device, and I'm rather interested in cobbling a few things together for it. I guess it's back to Google to look for alternatives. Drat, blast, and fie...

    Schwab

  73. Sony hasn't wanted our business for years by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sony hasn't wanted our business for years. Look at all the restrictions they put on their products: the weird file formats, the proprietary "Memory Stick", the DRM on their media products, the rootkit, and ..... Mission Impossible 3.

    --
    Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  74. Karma Whoring by Admiral+Frosty · · Score: 1

    Send it here.

    Let them know your thoughts.

  75. Now this would be a nice idea: by Ant+P. · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Imagine that Nintendo buys up the remains of Lik-Sang.

    They get rid of the illegitimate parts of their business, then let them carry on business as usual for Nintendo products, only they're on N's payroll and N gets all the profit.

    Imagine that. Buy any game you want in any part of the world when it comes out. No 6, 8 or 12 month delay farces like the N64 was plagued with, or having to go through grey markets.

    But that'll never happen, so here's hoping some good Wii/DS emulators show up soon.

    1. Re:Now this would be a nice idea: by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, can't wait to use my keyboard and mouse as a nunchuk.

      With the GameCube it was very easy to play imports. You only needed a freeloader, which came out a few months after the release. Probably won't be so easy with the Wii bu who knows.

    2. Re:Now this would be a nice idea: by und0 · · Score: 1

      Nintendo sued Lik-Sang in the not so distant past for selling modchip or backup devices...

  76. wikipedia by dlane99 · · Score: 1

    From wikipedia:
    Lik Sang has announced that it is closing its doors, as of October 24th 2006, because of those fags at Sony.
    I can't see this edit in the lik-sang article lasting long.

    1. Re:wikipedia by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1
      Lik Sang has announced that it is closing its doors, as of October 24th 2006, because of those fags at Sony.

      Being an Englishman who takes every word literally, do I take it that Sony employees are therefore using the communal smoking area outside of the Lik Sang office to the point where Lik Sang must stop the smoke filled air entering their building?

      Gor, blimey! Sum peepul dun arf take liburtees wiv there smurk breaks, dunnay?

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  77. Re:AND YET YOU HAVEN'T CANCELLED YOUR PS3 PREORDER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    My name is Kieth. Stop picking on me.

  78. Re:Big Companies Suck - Here's Why by nchip · · Score: 1

    Me too, I don't remember when I last bought anything from the evil giant!

    "DRM-Hell"
    I also hate how Windows media player DRM's cd's you rip with it! And PlaysForSure, if it's plays for so sure, why doesn't it work with their own player, zune? They don't need a rootkit since they already OWN your computer.

    "Propiertary media formats"
    WMA,WMV,DOC,XLS,SMB,MFC

    "Propiertary memory hardware"
    I haven't heard about this. Probably because they are not in memory card business (yet.. still many markets to grab over).

    "NO Post-Sale Support"
    That's unfair, you can call them for a new Activation code anytime!

    --
    signatures pending - ansa@kos.to - (dont mail there)
  79. Re: "Does not conform to CD Audio...." by twistedsymphony · · Score: 4, Informative

    No it's says that because it's a "Dual-Disc" release meaning it's a double sided "flipper" disc with one side Audio CD and the other side DVD (either DVD Audio or DVD Video). these discs change the location of the audio layer from a depth of 1.2mm to .6 mm which means some players will have trouble reading it... hence the warning.

  80. They are everyone. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "They" are the millions of people who don't read Slashdot and have no idea who Lik-Sang is. "They" are the people who only heard about the rootkit when it was on CNN. "They" are the millions of people who probably have a vague idea that their Gap t-shirt and Nike shoes were made by an underpaid child laborer, and don't really care; or that the $199 bargain PC they bought was probably made at a factory that dumps toxic waste into the environment, and buy it anyway. They are the people who keep Wal-Mart in business, even if the result is the elimination of local jobs or stores.

    Most people do not care about ethical dilemmas if taking the 'high road' costs more than a few dollars extra. If you want to get them involved in a boycott, there either has to be some tangible goal that will benefit them, or the boycott can't cost them anything.

    The free market value of a "warm, fuzzy feeling" is virtually nil.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:They are everyone. by Otter · · Score: 1
      "They" are the millions of people who don't read Slashdot and have no idea who Lik-Sang is.

      The point of yours I was responding to was that the moral titans who *do* read Slashdot should steal music and movies because it's too much to ask them live without Weird Al CD's. It's difficult to see how anyone else could possibly qualify as "sheep" by comparison.

    2. Re:They are everyone. by Some_Llama · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Most people do not care about ethical dilemmas if taking the 'high road' costs more than a few dollars extra."

      That's easy to say, but try working a low wage job and supporting a family, it's not that people don't care about these issues, it's that they can't afford to care.

      I have a wife and 3 children.

      I'd rather not shop at walmart, but I can't afford to spend 100 dollars more per month by going "the high road".

      I'd rather animals are treated humanely and then killed humanely for their meat, but I can't afford 5 dollars a pound for hamburger or 7 dollars a pound for chicken.

      Maybe what we need to do is rally around higher pay standards for the middle and lower classes, then we CAN make decisions that are the morally correct ones...

    3. Re:They are everyone. by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      And exactly where is this higher pay going to originate, since you keep Walmart (and the low paying jobs they need to survive) going?

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    4. Re:They are everyone. by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 1
      And exactly where is this higher pay going to originate, since you keep Walmart (and the low paying jobs they need to survive) going?
      What you're saying is that a relatively large group of people must be willing to suffer, and potentially make their families and children suffer, for the good of a cause.

      I realize how strongly you might want the goal - but you'll never get it from most people when that is what you expect.

      This is something I've thought a great deal about, and something I have yet to think of a way around. I have my own pet ideals that I wish everyone would "just understand and do it" but I have been around long enough to realize that isn't really productive.

      We want immediate gratification, even if "immediate gratification" means something takes 25 years instead of 100. We want it faster rather and usually that is simply not possible when human nature is a factor, particularly with social issues.

      Nobody - and I mean nobody - will sacrifice their well being, particularly their family's well being, for a cause, unless the price of NOT sacrificing is far higher (not just marginally higher - far higher). Usually, the only time that is true is in massive wars.

      Which is, incidentally, why I think a huge world war wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. War makes change easy.
      --

      We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
    5. Re:They are everyone. by Rohan427 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's because people don't care that they can't afford to care. By wanting something cheap, at any cost (and cost does NOT just apply to monetary cost), we (in the US) have begun a downward spiral for ourselves. We require cheap goods, so companies go off-shore to get them. In turn, the job market here decreases, making cheap goods no longer a want, but a need. The cycle continues, eventually sending our economy as a whole down the toilet. All this perpetuated by the "I don't care" attitude.

      What once was an industrial might, is now an industrial bug to be squashed in an instant. We are fast becoming a service oriented economy, and we will not survive, but people just don't care. People only care when it directly effects them, and then they bitch, moan, and complain about it and wonder how things got so bad. They never think to look at where things are going before they get there (which is the major difference between American corporations and, for example, Japanese corporations - that Japanese are looking to the future, the Americans are looking at today's profits).

      PGA

    6. Re:They are everyone. by Sebastian+Jansson · · Score: 1

      Being able to afford is a relative term. If you got 50% more pay, what would you spend it on, keeping the same standard as you have now, only with ethically better food. Or would you spend it on increasing you standard of living some more? I'm quite sure you aren't on the border of survival now. Only few western people really are.

      Instead I'd go for the democratic approach. If some product is produced in bad ways. For example mistreating animals. It should be illegal. If it's produced in worse, but still acceptable ways, like creating pollution. It should get an extra tax to compensate for that.

      Of course that's hard to do in such an undemocratic democracy as USA, which due to it's size can't ever work properly as a democracy. People can't feel any connection to the decisions if they're one of 200 million. It's hard enough when they're on of 10 million.

    7. Re:They are everyone. by acherusia · · Score: 1

      War makes change easy.

      No, it doesn't. It just makes it necessary.

    8. Re:They are everyone. by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      "If you got 50% more pay, what would you spend it on, keeping the same standard as you have now, only with ethically better food."

      I would shop at target or pennys or mervyns (to choose a few (west coast?) stores), which has better quality food and clothing, or even costco as most of their prices are only about 20% higher than walmart when comparing clothing and non-durable goods (because of the amount of goods you are purchasing at a time) when you break it down.

      When I purchase durable goods (non-food, non hygenic) I try to buy quality over quantity as I take care of my things and expect that if I pay a little more it will last a lot longer.

      When I can make a choice with negliable cost difference I try to "take the high road" but currently the choices to do so are far and few between.

      50% more pay is a huge difference and would make it actually possible to "do the right thing".

      Minimum wage is 6.75 currently in California, your talking 10.25 dollars an hour at a 50% increase. This is not enough to buy a bigger house, new car, plasma TV, but it would give someone the extra 100-200 a month to express their voice with dollars.

    9. Re:They are everyone. by kz45 · · Score: 1

      ""They" are the millions of people who don't read Slashdot and have no idea who Lik-Sang is. "They" are the people who only heard about the rootkit when it was on CNN. "They" are the millions of people who probably have a vague idea that their Gap t-shirt and Nike shoes were made by an underpaid child laborer, and don't really care; or that the $199 bargain PC they bought was probably made at a factory that dumps toxic waste into the environment, and buy it anyway. They are the people who keep Wal-Mart in business, even if the result is the elimination of local jobs or stores"

      Even though you may think they are under-paid, they are not. In India, the average pay for a worker might be $5/Hour. If a company decides to pay a worker $5/Hour, they are not being under-paid.

      China is the same way. Average pay there is considerably less than the rest of the world. Companies that decide to setup shop (such as nike) are not only creating jobs/prosperity, but saving families from complete poverty and starvation (children are going to work anyway) (it's a win-win situation).

      "They are the people who keep Wal-Mart in business, even if the result is the elimination of local jobs or stores"

      It's called competition. If a company comes into town that is better and cheaper, tough luck. Smaller stores will quickly learn how to adapt or go out of business.

    10. Re:They are everyone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about from the unearned income of the top 0.5% of Americans?

    11. Re:They are everyone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'd rather animals are treated humanely and then killed humanely for their meat, but I can't afford 5 dollars a pound for hamburger or 7 dollars a pound for chicken."

      Go vegetarian if you really feel that way. You'll save even more money in the long run and you'll probably be a little healthier, too.

    12. Re:They are everyone. by Trifthen · · Score: 1

      So think outside the box. I picked up 20lbs of frozen Elk from a farm in South Dakota. Even after shipping, it cost less than beef in the area, and it's much healthier meat. The guy runs the farm with himself and his kids, and even has pictures of the Elk grazing on his land. Apparently a couple states are really big for Elk and Bison farming, and you'd never find higher quality and fairly priced meat.

      But we understand the basic idea. Sometime it's too expensive to do the right thing when you're on a budget.

      --
      Read: Rabbit Rue - Free serial nove
    13. Re:They are everyone. by db32 · · Score: 1

      Ahh yes...the good ol "make em pay fines!" approach. I fail to see how this does any good, and even more I fail to see why people think it will. So here is the example. I am some giant evil megacorp producing $10 widgets by killing animals, deforestation, and lots of pollution. So those whiney toothless left wingers come in and start chanting, putting up signs, and making a big stink on the media...free PR! woohoo. So now...the government steps in...and decides "Hey, we can cash in on this too!" So they fine me $100 million dollars for being a bastard. Now the government is $100 million richer without raising taxes, I have tons of free PR, and your $10 widget now costs you $15 dollars and I am making more money than before. Oh what?! your minimum wage job didn't change?! The costs of the goods keeps going up because my cost of business goes up, and I'm not going to take a loss over some silly environut. Well doesn't that suck for you, I guess you will have to buy a few less widgets this year... So now the current balance is Megacorp 1, Government 1, People -2 (or maybe just -1 if you really convince yourself that the $100 million will go to public good instead of some lobbyist scum, slush fund, or just be handed over to Halliburton in some fashionable no bid contract).

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
  81. It's an insane reading of trademark law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    since these are GENUINE PRODUCTS. Not rip-off copies. The trademark was legitimate.

    What could be done is attack them for saying "Tesco's is a licensed Levi's distributor".

    The trademark protection is supposed to stop someone buying something that isn't really what is seems. E.g. Sorny walkman or "Rolex" watches. In the first case, it is confusingly similar and in the second a rip-off copy.

    That isn't the case here, since they are genuine Sony/Levi products.

    I don't buy Levi's or Sony stuff.

  82. Turns out by SuperKendall · · Score: 1, Funny

    Would you like to just temporarily remove those Sony salesman's genitals from your mouth and repeat what you just said? I couldn't understand you the first time...

    Turns out his moith was clear, you just had your head up your own ass. Try listening with less ass in your ears.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Turns out by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1
      Turns out his moith was clear, you just had your head up your own ass. Try listening with less ass in your ears.

      Please, don't get angry. Anyone can make a mistake... it's just that you *looked* like a Sony salesman, okay?

      How about I just disappear again and then the two of you can continue with your fellatio session...

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    2. Re:Turns out by Assassin17 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Would you like to just temporarily remove those Sony salesman's genitals from your mouth and repeat what you just said? I couldn't understand you the first time..."

      Turns out his moith was clear, you just had your head up your own ass. Try listening with less ass in your ears.


      "moith"? You meant "mouth", right? I'm no doctor, but that sounds like the mispronunciation of someone who's gagging on something.

    3. Re:Turns out by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Try listening with less ass in your ears."

      Then stop shouting!

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    4. Re:Turns out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol pwned

  83. Re: "Does not conform to CD Audio...." by Twanfox · · Score: 1

    How convenient. A dual meaning message. It could be copy protection, it could be a dual layer disk to throw you off. It's like Russian Roulette with CD Specs!

  84. Re:Big Companies Suck - Here's Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Propiertary memory hardware"
    I haven't heard about this. Probably because they are not in memory card business (yet.. still many markets to grab over).


    Have a look at today's woot: http://www.woot.com/
  85. That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 2, Informative

    We live in a capitalist system. In such a system if Sony can sue the ass off LikSang, and they feel that will increase their revenue, then they should. However capitalism only works if you have a strong legal system that protects the public at large. We should really be blaming our governments and our legal system for allowing this to happen.

    1. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Bassman59 · · Score: 1
      We live in a capitalist system. In such a system if Sony can sue the ass off LikSang, and they feel that will increase their revenue, then they should.

      You're an idiot; a true capitalist would never resort to using the court system to achieve their goals. The courts are representatives of the government, after all, and capitalists want governments to stay out of business matters entirely.

    2. Re:That's capitalism baby! by sesshomaru · · Score: 2, Informative

      He meant mercantilist system, but I blame the American education system, which conflates the two.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    3. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 2, Informative
      We live in a capitalist system. In such a system if Sony can sue the ass off LikSang, and they feel that will increase their revenue, then they should.
      You're an idiot; a true capitalist would never resort to using the court system to achieve their goals. The courts are representatives of the government, after all, and capitalists want governments to stay out of business matters entirely.
      From wikipedia (the definitive source of all human knowledge):
      Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately owned, and capital is invested in the production, distribution and other trade of goods and services, for profit in a competitive free market.
      In a capitalist system corporations do whatever is require to maximise profit. If government intervention maximises profit so be it. They operate purely on this single pragmatic principle. If they lobby against government intervention they do so in the belief that this will, in the long term, maximise profit.
    4. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 1
      He meant mercantilist system, but I blame the American education system, which conflates the two.
      I don't get it. A mercantilist system appears to be "an economic theory which holds that the prosperity of a nation depends upon its supply of capital, and that the global volume of trade is unchangeable.". That not really what I'm implying. Would a capitalist really argue that the state should not moderate the actions of industry? That for example corporations should be allowed to commit murder? Doesn't sound much like a requirement of being a capitalist to me. Perhaps Anarcho-capitalism which rejects the concepts of state but not capitalism per se.
    5. Re:That's capitalism baby! by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Exccept abusing property rights, to achieve a government granted monopoly would probably come under the definition of "government intervention", don't you think? Or do the "PSP Police" go to Hongkong and beat the workers dead?

    6. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Bassman59 · · Score: 1
      In a capitalist system corporations do whatever is require to maximise profit. If government intervention maximises profit so be it. They operate purely on this single pragmatic principle. If they lobby against government intervention they do so in the belief that this will, in the long term, maximise profit.
      Government intervention usually leads to regulation, which is anathema to free-market true believers.
    7. Re:That's capitalism baby! by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      Ahem... no capitalism per se would be competition... sueing someone who cannot defent himself due to lack of legal funds and thus opening a monopoly governmental granted is on the borderline to communisn/faschism/oligarchism, you name it same thing different roots!

    8. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 1
      In a capitalist system corporations do whatever is require to maximise profit. If government intervention maximises profit so be it. They operate purely on this single pragmatic principle. If they lobby against government intervention they do so in the belief that this will, in the long term, maximise profit.
      Government intervention usually leads to regulation, which is anathema to free-market true believers.
      Individuals may be free-market true belivers corporations are not, corporations are entities designed to maximise profit not promote a particular belief system.
    9. Re:That's capitalism baby! by MemoryDragon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Depends... a pure capitalistic system is determined to doom, the end of capitalism usually is fascism due to a single monopoly or an oligarchic monopoly of konglomerates having enough wealth to dominate over the government (a system as close to stalinistic communism as you can get because those systems althoug coming from different roots always are the same in the end) Hence deregulation and splitting of monopolistic companies is a must of every capitalistic society to survive in the long term. The problem we have currently on a worldwide scale is that sometimes in the 80s and 90s and even now the deregulation mechanisms have heavily failed in case of many multinational corporations. They have outgrown the governments to a certain degree and we are on the road to the end of capitalism towards a oligarchic dictatorship. In some points we have crossed the line already, like we can see how things are pushed down onto national levels which clearly hurt local economies and even worse the environment (genetically enhanced food for instance, which in the end can result in a worldwide famine if things go wrong, or the patent law going haiwire, or the globalisation which only works once it comes to labor but is suddenly stopped with trials and local regulations once it comes down to international competition in selling goods) In some points we have not crossed the line... But as I said we are on a dangerous road into something we will be called capitalism but will not have anything to do with it and which will be closer to other systems of the past.

    10. Re:That's capitalism baby! by argent · · Score: 1

      In a free market there would be no mechanism for Sony to put LikSang out of business other than refusing to sell a product to them. This isn't capitalism, it's some kind of bizarre twist on protectionism by proxy.

    11. Re:That's capitalism baby! by argent · · Score: 1

      Let me hilight another part of your quote:

      Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately owned, and capital is invested in the production, distribution and other trade of goods and services, for profit in a competitive free market.

      An externally enforced monopoly is not part of a free market.

    12. Re:That's capitalism baby! by argent · · Score: 1

      Individuals may be free-market true belivers corporations are not, corporations are entities designed to maximise profit not promote a particular belief system.

      The original poster claimed that this was an example of capitalism in action.

      This is clearly not the case.

      The fact that a corporation is willing to take advantage of the monopoly-socialist handouts from the government doesn't change the fact that this is not "capitalism".

    13. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Blue+Fox+USA · · Score: 1

      "the end of capitalism usually is fascism due to a single monopoly or an oligarchic monopoly of conglomerates having enough wealth to dominate over the government (a system as close to Stalinist communism as you can get because those systems, although coming from different roots, always are the same in the end)"

      Wow! Sounds familiar...

      *sigh* I remember when we were a capitalistic nation. Ah, the good ol' days...

    14. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 1
      Ahem... no capitalism per se would be competition... sueing someone who cannot defent himself due to lack of legal funds and thus opening a monopoly governmental granted is on the borderline to communisn/faschism/oligarchism, you name it same thing different roots!
      In a capitalistic system a corporation will take full advantage of the legal system to secure profits. They will also attempt to alter government policy if this proves profitable. The corporation will attempt to stifle competition and subvert the political process. That may mean you no longer have a democracy but I don't see how it means you have a communist system. Also, what is oligarchism? Do you have a reference, I'd be interested in learning about it.
    15. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 1
      In a free market there would be no mechanism for Sony to put LikSang out of business other than refusing to sell a product to them. This isn't capitalism, it's some kind of bizarre twist on protectionism by proxy.
      But how do you mitigate against this without additional regulation? In a sense we have a free market, ``price is determined by unregulated supply and demand'' it's just that due to their size large corporations have a huge advantage. How can this be mitigated against without additional regulation?
    16. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 1
      Let me hilight another part of your quote:
      Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately owned, and capital is invested in the production, distribution and other trade of goods and services, for profit in a competitive free market.
      An externally enforced monopoly is not part of a free market. How do you feel a monopoly is being externally enforced? The problem, as I see it, is that large corporations are able to exert a large amount of pressure on the government and public opinion, which is entirely what I'd expect them to do, they are after all trying to maximise proft. I guess I see that as almost a inevitable result of a capitalistic system.
    17. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Adam+Hazzlebank · · Score: 1
      Individuals may be free-market true belivers corporations are not, corporations are entities designed to maximise profit not promote a particular belief system. The original poster claimed that this was an example of capitalism in action. This is clearly not the case. The fact that a corporation is willing to take advantage of the monopoly-socialist handouts from the government doesn't change the fact that this is not "capitalism".
      I guess what I'm saying is that this is entirely how I would expect a corporation to act with capitalistic motives. To take the maximum advantage of the legal system in order to maximise profit. I can't really blame Sony, I can blame our governments and legal system for allowing itself to be manipulated perhaps. But I'm not even sure about that.
    18. Re:That's capitalism baby! by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      Wrong.

      This is the opposite of capitalism. Capitalism is about individual property rights. About the right, once you own something, to burn it, dilute it, crush it, put it on public display or to sell it.

      What the EU Trademark Directive does is anti-capitalist. It says that even though Lik-Sang have paid for the PSPs, they can't sell them as they see fit. That the only people who are allowed to sell such items in the EU are Sony and their approved agents.

    19. Re:That's capitalism baby! by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

      There are always rights that are above capitalism, that trump the capitalist system. Imposing your will on another human being without their permission is part of that.

    20. Re:That's capitalism baby! by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      Corporations have an advantage because the people let them get away with it. Because they lobby parliaments for more protectionism, and we don't fill our representatives mail sacks with letters of complaints.

      Corporations can pay for a party, but in the end, the final power to sanction that party rests with the voters.

    21. Re:That's capitalism baby! by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1
    22. Re:That's capitalism baby! by dhaines · · Score: 1

      I'm in no way a Sony fan, and I have been a satisfied Lik-Sang customer. But I'm hardly of a mind to blame "our governments and our legal system" if Lik-Sang didn't show up to defend themselves.

    23. Re:That's capitalism baby! by argent · · Score: 1

      But how do you mitigate against this without additional regulation?

      Mitigate against what?

      I think you may be reading more into my post than is actually there. I'm not arguing that regulation isn't necessary, I'm just pointing out that it's regulation that makes Sony's actions possible... whether Sony is a capitalist corporation or a socialist cooperative. This isn't an example of capitalism in action, it's an example of how a mixed economic system can be subverted. Yes, of course, Capitalism can also be subverted by unscrupulous entities - as can any other system or any balance-point you pick between systems. Figuring out where to stand and where to place your board as you surf the shockwave is what makes politics and economics so engrossing. :)

      Back to topic:

      In a free market Sony couldn't (for one example) use the British government to prevent LikSang from shipping grey market Playstations to Britain, or (in the end) do anything but refuse to sell Playstations to LikSang. And the way you mitigate against THAT is to set up cut-out fronts to buy the Playstations for you.

    24. Re:That's capitalism baby! by argent · · Score: 1

      How do you feel a monopoly is being externally enforced?

      By the UK government through the court system refusing to let LikSang sell Playstations in the UK. That mechanism would not exist in a free market.

      Taking that mechanism away would probably be a bad idea overall, but the reactions that I see from people at both ends of the economic debate when something like this happens show an alarming misunderstanding of what's actuallygoing on.

      From the right: "That's Capitalism, it's great, too bad for the losers but you gotta let this stuff happen". It's not capitalism, and in their ideal world it wouldn't happen.

      From the left: "that's Capitalism, it's terrible, we need to stop them before it happens again". It's not Capitalism, and what happened is the result of a previous round of "we gotta stop them"...

      This kind of thing may or may not be necessary, but let's not let the sloganistas confuse us about what "this kind of thing" is.

    25. Re:That's capitalism baby! by argent · · Score: 1

      I guess what I'm saying is that this is entirely how I would expect a corporation to act with capitalistic motives.

      The motives aren't the issue. There are many motives a group, coorporation, individual, cooperative, or company might have for wanting to limit the sale or use of their products or services... many of these motives are ones you would probably agree with, but someone else will always see the end result as an abuse of the system.

      Besides... capitalism doesn't actually deal in motives at all. Companies do things all the time that significantly hurt their total profitability because someone or some group of people in the company wants it that way. For an example close to this case, Sony's schizophrenic relationship between its hardware and content arms is a perfect example of this: if they were interested in maximizing profits they would never have restricted the abilities of Minidiscs to satisfy their content division, and would have avoided all kinds of DRM-related fiascos since then. Microsoft's got some kind of problem with placing control over profits, and have trashed their share in many potential markets or only recovered a place in them at the last minute after someone in Microsoft managed to get them to back down. And all the way back to US Steel... when a monopoly is broken up the companies remaining usually end up making *more* money for their collective stockholders than they had any expectation of beforehand.

      In fact, it's stock market regulations, set up to control abuses of the stock market by individuals, that have ironically created an environment that increases the focus on short term profit.

    26. Re:That's capitalism baby! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lolollolololo....no Sir, YOU are the idiot. Corporations OWN governments all over the world and dictate government policy beneficial to corporations. Fuck the public (as governmental insiders would say) it's all about our friends and sponsors in big-business. You blind fool

  86. The same thing happened to Bleem! by Rosebud128 · · Score: 1

    The lawsuits against Lik-Sang are fairly petty. Copyright violation of putting parts of the PSP manual online. Trademark violation for shipping PSPs to the UK. And so on. The purpose was to keep suing as Lik-Sang could not afford all these expensive court battles. This is the same way Sony destroyed Bleem!. Looks like Sony learned something from the Immersion lawsuits.

    The UK Courts went along with this, I suspect, more due to the taxation they lose on importers.

    Sony's interest in all this:

    -Price fixing (PS3s are cheaper in Japan than everywhere else. This price fixing alone should remove the 'region free' attitude Sony pretends to embrace. (Importing a Japanese PS3 would probably be cheaper than buying one locally.)

    -Blu-Ray is not region free. Importers ruin the Blu-Ray Domination scheme.

    Playasia is next.

    1. Re:The same thing happened to Bleem! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The UK Courts went along with this, I suspect, more due to the taxation they lose on importers.

      This seems an unwarranted comment on the independence of the UK legal judiciary. How about they went along because it was against the law. Sony found a way to hack trademark law to close down a grey market channel; it sucks but that is the legislator's fault. There seems to be the strange view often expressed on /. that it's up to judges to fix bad laws.

    2. Re:The same thing happened to Bleem! by falcon5768 · · Score: 1
      There seems to be the strange view often expressed on /. that it's up to judges to fix bad laws.
      Actually reading into the case its more, a bad judge made his own interpretation of the law. Which is what the case is here. Unfortunatly for the rest of us, Lik-sang doesnt have the money to shove it his face. The fun thing about justice... only the rich can afford it.
      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  87. New Business Model? by iFrank · · Score: 1

    Lik-Sang should be serving Google ads on their site right now. With all of the hits they're receiving from not only Slashdot, but Digg *gasp*, Wired, etc., they'd have a nice little income for their brief stint as victim. I forsee a new business model: piss off major corporation; have millions of people flood your site in a short time; serve ads; make money; run to Mexico with your new mistress, Juanita.

  88. God, this Iis so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last week it was "please buy Sony, so Microsoft doesn't buy them out". Will Slashdot make up it's mind? Once again proving my point that if MS did buy Sony it would be for the best for the consumer. Not that MS would ever take over Sony, I think they have their hands full as it is.
        Sony does need to be brought down a peg or two. I love people crying over how they think MS is a monopoly, when Sony makes them look like mere amateurs. A Sony-owned artist gets distributed on Sony media, to be played on Sony equipment. Which wouldn't be so bad, if they didn't make everything so proprietary. I can't wait until they Betamax the Blueray tech nology.

  89. Bah by Tainek · · Score: 1

    Usually i cannot stand people who say "Im Boycotting XYZ because of this" because it rarely makes a difference

    But in this case, i can see this working, theres a lot of momentum behind the boycott now, from both this and past offenses

    I Hope Sony gets whats coming to them

    Chalk me up for the Boycot, this is several grands worth of spending money nintendo and toshiba will be enjoying instead

  90. Ow, great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope they can appeal to the court, and stop this nonsense. Sony may not know, but this is hurting themselves; I live in Brazil, a country plagued by piracy, because no company ever paid attention to at least 18 million potential customers (10% of population, rich people, the same as the whole population of UK). Now, the only way to get legal games is paying US$100-US$150 for a PS2/Xbox/GC/Xbox360/DS game on stores that import themselves, or importing youself, and that's the reason piracy is so big over here.

    Guess which console is easier to find, easier to buy modded, and owns about 80% of brazillian hardware marketshare?!

    But there are people that instead decided to support the companies and buy legal games trough importers, like Lik-Sang, WHAT WON'T HAPPEN ANYMORE! Because if Sony could win over Lik-Sang, every gaming company can do the same, relying on that judge's decision. Also, they can rely on that to sue ANY import reseller.

    This must be a f'cking joke.

  91. Boycott by WilyCoder · · Score: 1

    I am not buying a PS3 until I can get it used, and all the games I want used. For the first time in my life, I want the retailer getting the profits, not the manufacturer. Can anyone with a business mind tell me if this is a good plan to enjoy the franchise games I've played for years, but without contributing to Sony's evil tactics?

  92. Are you a walking billboard? by Kombat · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why must I buy a pair of fucking shoes for $80+ when a pair that are $20 are just as good (if not BETTER)? same goes for pants, shirts, you name it

    I have to disagree with you there. In most cases, the old adage "you get what you pay for" holds true. Take running shoes for example. A good pair of running shoes is going to set you back at least $100, no matter what. If you buy anything cheaper, you're simply risking injury. That's just what it costs to make a good pair of running shoes.

    Or how about sunglasses? Yes, Oakleys and Ray Bans are overpriced, but they actually are much better sunglasses than the kind on the spinning rack at the local drug store.

    That said, while I do often buy name brand products when they are legitimately better, I resent advertising for them. I don't wear shirts with a big "Nike" swoosh plastered on the chest. I'm not a walking billboard. Why would I pay $35 for the "privilege" of walking around advertising for your brand? They should be paying me! I buy nice things that are high quality and will hold up to use, I just don't like to give them free advertising.

    --
    Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    1. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      "A good pair of running shoes is going to set you back at least $100, no matter what...That's just what it costs to make a good pair of running shoes."

      I beg to differ, that's what it costs to BUY a good pair of running shoes, i'd be surprised if the materials and labor (esp shoes made over sees, which is um all of them) costs were above 10 dollars per pair to MAKE them, more likely around 5.

      Marketing is also expensive but i'd argue not really needed (at least in the size of budgets most companies spend) if you have a quality product.

    2. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by ariad · · Score: 1

      A $100 pair of running shoes costs $100 because the company has to pay for advertising and make a profit, the actual shoe costs much less than $100 in manufacturing costs. Plus there is a retailer markup. I would venture to say that when it is all said and done at least 50% of the money you pay is going to several companies for profit. It's true that a $20 shoe will be of a lower quality than a $100 shoe but it isn't all lost because of the quality of the product. The company doesn't have the giant advertising bill, the employee base, and I would assume not as many middle men. It isn't all in the cost of the materials and labor. Nike has to pay professional athletes to wear their shoes, but brand X doesn't. So to be competitive they have a lower profit per shoe to try to gain a large number of value shoppers to gain as much profit as they can. It's just different business strategies born from the different companies operating environments.

    3. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Kombat · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      While nobody denies that there is a substantial markup built into the price of a pair of Nikes, my point was simply that the $20 pair of sneakers the grandparent was referring to are even more shoddily-made, and are constructed of lower-quality materials. While the expensive name-brand shoes are certainly overpriced, the truth is that they are in fact better shoes than a bargain-brand at WalMart. They more properly support your foot, are made of better materials, and will hold up to more wear.

      Also, as far as I know, Saucony running shoes are made in the USA. They are expensive, and they are great shoes, worth every penny.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    4. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by bynary · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In most cases, the old adage "you get what you pay for" holds true.

      I completely disagree with you on this point. The best pair of running shoes I ever purchased was $15 at Shopko. My track coach gave everyone a list of criteria to meet for an approved pair of shoes. He personally checked each pair and used the pair I bought as the example of a good running shoe.

      What are sunglasses for? Shielding your eyes from the sun. A pair of $5 glasses with a high SPF rating does just as good of a job blocking out UV as a $200 pair of designer sunglasses. Ray Bans and Oakleys don't have some magical properties that make them better at blocking out UV. They just might look cooler and be made from more expensive materials (even then it's probably the difference between $1.00 of platinum and $0.05 of aluminum).

      ...I resent advertising for them.

      This I agree with wholeheartedly. I buy most of my clothing from the discount rack at Old Navy (because their clothes just happen to be designed for people with my body type). I don't buy anything from them full price. However, I own nothing that actually broadcasts "Old Navy". Just like you, I don't feel like being a walking billboard for any company.

      --
      http://www.bynarystudio.com
    5. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by nuintari · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Or how about sunglasses? Yes, Oakleys and Ray Bans are overpriced, but they actually are much better sunglasses than the kind on the spinning rack at the local drug store.


      I wear presctiption sunglasses, which cost a small fortune, stand up to anything, and have to be comfortable because I can't see shit without them. Let me assure you, Oakleys and Ray-Bans are _not_ a high quality product. Better than the spinny rack? Yes. But that doesn't mean they aren't junk.
      --

      --Nuintari

      slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.

    6. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by fossa · · Score: 4, Informative

      "A good pair of running shoes is going to set you back at least $100, no matter what. If you buy anything cheaper, you're simply risking injury."

      It is simply untrue to claim that inexpensive running shoes come with the risk of injury. Sorry to drift off-topic, but this is an oft repeated falsehood that I once believed myself, and I'd like to share what I've since learned. Review literature on the subject concludes that the only reliable predictors for injury are experience level, training load, and history of previous injury. In particular, a sudden increase in training load often results in injury, and one might speculate that beginners are more prone to this error.

      There is no evidence that cushioning or motion control technologies have done anything to reduce the incidence of injury over the years. Indeed, some groups, including westerners on concrete, run in bare feet, without obviously higher injury rates than those wearing "good" running shoes, though peer-reviewed studies are scarce. The biomechanics of running and running injuries are simply not well understood. As such it's difficult to claim that any particular design can reduce injury rates.

    7. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Funny that, I've been told by some rather serious runners to avoid expensive shoes, because they're gimmicks.

      But you miss the point entirely. The purpose of the branding is to illustrate your disposible income as a measure of status. The less sophisticated the audience, the more obvious the branding. That's is why the logos on clothing for high-schoolers is far more prominent than the clothing for adults. When you buy Oakleys, or Air Jordans, or whatever today's fad is, you are quite literally paying for the right to display how much money you have to lose.

    8. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by damiam · · Score: 1

      I have no idea what goes into good running shoes, but I'll bet it's a lot more than $10 of materials and labor. Nike doesn't have a monopoly, and if they were making substancial excess profit, someone else would step in and undercut them. After all, if it only takes $10 to make a good pair of shoes, you could make your own and sell them for $30 and rake in the cash.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    9. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Dravik · · Score: 1

      I think your both wrong. Generally buying the hot name brand product will get you a good quality product that isn't really worth what you paid. Buying off the bargain rack will almost always get you a piece of junk. Most sunglasses from Walmart will block UVA and UVB rays effectivly and that is all most people need. There are other considerations though. Those sunglasses from Walmart generally won't be near as durable. It's not uncommon to have the protective layer on those sunglasses wear off after only a couple of months. There are also anti glare, anti laser and anti fog coatings that you generally won't find on the cheap stuff. Oakley class sunglasses will have less visual distortion and will generally be ANSI rated for eye protection. Most of these things aren't relevant to someone just going to the beach a couple of times over the summer. If someone is rock climbing the price for Oakleys is probably worth it to make sure the handhold they see out of the corner of their eye is really where they think it is.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    10. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by aclarke · · Score: 1

      I don't buy Nike shoes, and I am not much of a runner anyway, but one thing Saucony, Nike, Reebok, etc. are doing that Kwang Fo isn't doing is research. Paying Tiger Woods millions of dollars maybe isn't the best research, but when you have many of the world's top athletes relying on your shoes to help them break world records, that is going to translate into a better shoe for the rest of us. These companies expect more from the athletes than simply "wearing their shoes."

    11. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Kombat · · Score: 1, Informative

      There is no evidence that cushioning or motion control technologies have done anything to reduce the incidence of injury over the years. Indeed, some groups, including westerners on concrete, run in bare feet, without obviously higher injury rates than those wearing "good" running shoes, though peer-reviewed studies are scarce. The biomechanics of running and running injuries are simply not well understood. As such it's difficult to claim that any particular design can reduce injury rates.

      Well, "evidence" didn't cure my shinsplits. But custom orthotics and a good pair of motion-control running shoes did. I haven't had shinsplints at all since I made the switch, so even if it is bunk, it worked for me, for whatever reason.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    12. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Funny
      Let me tell you a story about cheap sunglasses. I was exporting a container of them from China to America. I asked the Chinese factory guy if they had UV protection. Well, there was some problem translating this, so we go back and forth for a while. Finally, the Chinese factory guy gets it, and his face lights up and he says, "Yes! We have sticker!"

      True story.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I work in China, manufacturing garments (management...DUH! People have accused me of being a factory worker...who speaks native level English...and posts on Slashdot...anyway). It does indeed cost quite a bit more to manufacture a quality shoe. You are correct that the factory cost and the retail price are quite a bit different. However, you forget to factor in such factors as research & development (yes running shoes require R&D), the cost of advertising, shipping, and so on. When you buy a brand name, you're not just buying leather and laces, you're also buying the brand...by displaying its logo, you are enhancing your status among your peers. This is why brand name merchandise is so much more profitable than other types. I could show you a shoe equal to the one that you have, at half the price, and you wouldn't buy it because you'd think that there's something wrong with it because the price is too low. Seen it happen a million times, and I've lost contracts because my prices weren't high enough.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    14. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by fossa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed, shoes affect different people in different ways. I had shin splints in some shoes and running surfaces, but not in other shoes. My anecdotal evidence is that running barefoot on grass, dirt, concrete, and pavement (surfaces free of sharp pebbly rocks) has become more comfortable than running in shoes (and less expensive and more fun, especially when there is mud). This doesn't mean barefeet work for everyone, but it also means expensive shoes are not inherently superior to cheap shoes (with my barefoot adaptations I can run just fine in bed slippers or mocassins or anything with enough flexibility) or even no shoes.

      And to my surprise, when I researched to make sure I wasn't damaging myself, I found no science in support of current shoe designs. Conclusion: whatever works for you is best; don't be fooled into thinking expensive shoes will necessarily "work for you".

    15. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by nasch · · Score: 1
      There are also anti glare, anti laser and anti fog coatings that you generally won't find on the cheap stuff.
      ANTI LASER?? Please, please tell us more about the anti-laser coatings on expensive sunglasses.
    16. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, I've read somewhere that if there is too much cushioning, injuries are more likely.

      Apparently, the cushioning makes it more difficult for the brain to figure out how to position the ankles to reduce injury risk.

    17. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its true you become a walking billboard for the company but have you ever tried to think of any positive effects of wearing a particular brand?

      I know some of the clothes that I buy are going to be over-priced but I also like the fact that I can associate myself with a company that reflects my interests (ie. Helly Hansen, Rossignol = skiing, outdoor-life). If I see some girl wearing a Helly Hansen sweater then I think its relatively safe to surmise that she is interested in outdoorsy-type things. Is it superficial? Sure it is, it is most certainly on the outside, but it can reflect whats on the inside.

    18. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if I can buy 20 pairs of Walmart sunglasses for the same price as a pair of Oakleys, who cares if they're durable? Besides, they'll probably get misplaced before I ever get a chance to break them.

      I just went to Walmart to buy an umbrella. I figured they were probably $5. They were ONE DOLLAR. So, since I had expected to pay $5, I bought five umbrellas. Five shitty umbrellas are just as durable as one good one (I've broken one, but the other four still work fine!)

    19. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      This, in turn, isn't entirely true.

      Certain shoes (not necessarily [in]expensive ones) can cause you to over/under-pronate, which in turn can lead to knee/ankle/shin problems down the road. If your feet are hitting the ground at a bad angle, you're going to get injured. If you're able to run barefoot, your feet are likely more suited to it than the average person is.

      Any experienced runner can relate to a particularly bad pair of shoes they've owned. I know my worst pair definitely wasn't the cheapest.

      You just have to buy whatever fits you the best. For some people, this is inexpensive, and for others, it can cost quite a bit.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    20. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by davecb · · Score: 1

      I used to fence, and fencing shoes run the $50-$80.00 range, despite being almost a one-off product. Nevertheless, these relatively cheap shoes eliminated a severe pain.

      Conclusion: good mass-market shoes sould cost less than $50.00

      --dave

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    21. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by fossa · · Score: 1

      Correlations have been found between pronation and knee pain, for example. This of course does not imply causality, and as I understand the state of the research it's a bit early to be making claims that preventing overpronation will prevent injury. I would welcome any news to the contrary. I agree that different shoes will work for different people, but I'm not sure the standard shoe advice of "overpronators need motion control" etc. is worth anything. For myself at least, I always preferred lightweight and flexible shoes despite the recommendations of running shoes stores for my mild overpronation (the stores never followed up on a purchase to ask how I liked the shoe, so I'm not even sure where they get information to make these recommendations). So in my experience, everyone's on their own to find what works for them.

      I'm not convinced that so few people are suited to running barefoot. Cynically, the shoe companies would certainly rather you buy shoes, but the lack of scientific evidence tells me they don't really have any more clue than I do on how to prevent injury. The recent speculations that many human features evolved for better distance running are also interesting. I only have anecdotal evidence, but I've heard from high arched to low arched folks all doing fine barefoot. Barefoot running definitely requires time to adapt and should not be attempted recklessly (the same should be said for any running or exercise). Took me two months to really feel good running barefoot. But I'm glad I did it because now I don't have to go through the hassle of finding shoes that fit, not to mention the cash savings. And mud feels awesome.

    22. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by shadowbearer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mod parent up.

        The only thing that $ will buy you in footwear nowadays is possibly longer life (don't count on that, either.) It won't buy you comfort. Everyone's feet differ, every situation differs.

        (My foot doctor told me he's never seen feet like mine (13WW with a super-high arch). Despite that, he managed to make me comfortable, using a $15 clearance pair of tennies from Kmart as a base, two years in a row now. I'll spend money on a cobbler before I'll spend it on expensive shoes. All the crap in the advertisements and by salesmen is just that - crap. They aren't paid enough to know any better. Find someone who actually looks at your feet. /rant )

        (I don't run, but I do spend more than 12 hours on my feet every day. Until a couple years ago, I used to spend an hour in agony afterward, every day. Not anymore. Thank you, Dr. Bennis ;-) )

        I used to spend over a hundred dollars per pair on shoes. At least one pair of those contributed to my long-term pain more than they helped my short-term - but not that was not evident until months had gone by, and I couldn't go back and get refunded. The last pair of expensive shoes I bought lasted a whole six months. Woo.

        I grieve for the death of the small business cobbler. Oftentimes they'd know one's feet better than one knew them oneself. Unintended effect of modern business, maybe, but it still sucks. I'd trade federal protection against bad business for having a lot of the small biz back. At least one had more choices.

        The nearest cobbler to here is three hours away, not likely to know me. But I do have a very good local foot doctor - even if he is more expensive, and is constantly buried in people whose feet have been fucked up by mass-produced shoes.

        Moo. I wish more people realized what it means when we drive local small biz out of viability, and would vote so. Not that voting makes a fucking difference anymore, and now I'm getting way off topic, so /end rant

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    23. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

        Meanwhile the rest of us suffer, because the small outlets we prefer who are actually customer-friendly and get-to-know-you are being driven out of business by the big outlets who sell the (generic) brands. Meanwhile the market for more foot doctors booms - and we suffer from that, too, from higher costs. And the insurance companies benefit...

        What a clusterfuck. Not that it's new, it's been happening for quite a while, but it's still a clusterfuck.

        I once knew an old man
        Who could fit a shoe to anyone

        But volumed out, a legal ban
        and now greeter at Cost Is One.

        bad poetry ;-)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    24. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Dravik · · Score: 1

      The US military uses laser targeting/pointing/aiming devices in many areas. Anti-laser coatings have been added to various product lines of multiple brands that have a significant number of soldiers as customers. This was actually requested by the army and Oakleys have been issued to soldiers to counter eyesight damage that was becoming an issue in certain specialties.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    25. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Dravik · · Score: 1

      For most people most of the time WalMarts sun glasses are all they need. But that doesn't mean that the additional features of expensive sunglasses don't have value or that there are markets where they are really needed.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    26. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Laser radiation is coherent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherence_%28physics %29), i.e. it can be thought as packets of very large continuos waves. As far as I remember, the average length of coherent wave in red laser is about 100 meters (to compare to few micrometers in sunlight).

      Anti-laser coating uses this property to create a destructive interference which nullifies laser light: laser ray enters coating film, the opposite side of film reflects half of ray's photons back and then they are again reflected by the 'front' side of film and then it destructively interferes with the original light ray.

      It won't work on 'normal' light because by the time the reflected rays returns from the front side of coating the original wave has already passed the coating and the next part of wave is NOT coherent with the original one.

      Of course, anti-laser coatings are not 100% effective and they can work only in fairly narrow frequence band (i.e. only for red lasers or only for green/blue lasers).

    27. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insecurity?

    28. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by Builder · · Score: 1

      Maybe you can help me... Can you recommend decent sunglasses for someone with -6 vision in both eyes? I've been to a load of opticians in the UK and none of them can help me.

    29. Re:Are you a walking billboard? by mrsteele · · Score: 1

      "What are sunglasses for? Shielding your eyes from the sun. A pair of $5 glasses with a high SPF rating does just as good of a job blocking out UV as a $200 pair of designer sunglasses."

      Blocking UV is hardly the only reason to wear sunglasses. I have a number of requirements when I buy a pair of sunglasses, since I use them when cycling daily. Cheap off-the-rack ones are acceptable for walking around town, but not when you use them during activities.

      And even if you don't care about any fit or features, I really find it hard to believe that you wouldn't notice the enormous difference between the drugstore glasses and even a $50 pair. They distort the light less, and let you see much more clearly. If that's not an obvious benefit, you don't wear sunglasses much. I remember the first time I got a NICE pair of sunglasses. I was used to removing my sunglasses when I wanted to see more detail, but I had to eliminate that habit since removing my glasses now revealed *less* detail.

  93. Sony... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

    Wii will remember this!

  94. Boycott Sony? by JoshDM · · Score: 1

    OK. It's not like I was going to buy a PS3 or a PSP anyway. Wii for me, and maybe a high-def-playing Xbox 360 when I get my Sony HD TV... oh crap. Looks like it's Panasonic for me.

  95. Boo hoo! by Kombat · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I think we all need to send a polite letter to Mr. Yankovic that we cannot purchase his music because of his distributor. With any luck, that will add a semi-important figure to the cause.

    "The cause?" "The cause???" What "cause?" The plight of some piddly little Hong Kong company that makes its money by skirting international trade laws? You think Weird Al is going to pull the plug on his most successful album ever to stand up for the right to illegally import non-compliant electronics in Europe?

    Get over yourself!

    --
    Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    1. Re:Boo hoo! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You think Weird Al is going to pull the plug on his most successful album ever to stand up for the right to illegally import non-compliant electronics in Europe?

      I think a better reason is because his album, according to the OP, is not a true CD and doesn't play in most newer CD players. What's the point in buying an album if you can't play it? (Or worse, you can't rip it and play the MP3s/Oggs on your iPod or other portable music player?)

    2. Re:Boo hoo! by Too+Many+Secrets · · Score: 0

      Late response but Al's CDs have not been CD compliant since at least running with scissors. He puts videos and such on them for "added value", making them hybrid discs. --rev

    3. Re:Boo hoo! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Are hybrid CDs (those containing data tracks in addition to music tracks) not CD compliant? I thought they were.
      At any rate, they're still perfectly capable of playing on any CD player, whether they're ancient ones, or new CD-ROMs, as far as I know. I have several of them by various artists, and I've never had a problem with them on any of my players/computers. The players just ignore the data track.

      These copy-protected CDs, on the other hand, are deliberately broken so they can't play on computers.

    4. Re:Boo hoo! by Too+Many+Secrets · · Score: 0

      You're right about the copy protection. I've had some old car stereos and such that would not play any kind of "hybrid" disc (I don't know the real term for them), so I can only assume that it's either an update to the standard, or it's not compliant.

      Just being pedantic, don't mind me. :)

  96. Wait a minute??? by 8127972 · · Score: 1

    "Many thanks to Sony for ruining it for the rest of us. I hope that your business model makes up for the customer goodwill you're lighting on fire today."

    I thought that it was their batteries that were on fire?

    --
    This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
  97. Better yet. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    DON"T BUY THE PS-3!!!
    We are a drop in the bucket for movies, TV Shows, and Music.
    We are not when it comes to first adopters.
    Don't buy the PS-3 don't buy blue ray.

    Now if someone will please tell me where I can import stuff for my Dreamcast and DS lite please?
    I was going to buy the Opera Webbrowser today but now I am really out of luck.

    Sony you have become more evil then Microsoft at this point.

    What I have not seen is the REAL REASON why Sony went after them.
    The PS-3 is going to be cheaper in Japan. Sony would loose out on soaking the customers in the EU.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  98. That's easy by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    Much easier to boycott than you think: their cameras don't support standard storage mediums and their PS3 is too damn expensive. For the rest of the range it really doesn't matter.

    Unfortunately most of the larger market couldn't care about the shit Sony is dealing up these days, as long as they get their mega TV.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  99. PS3 vs. Mercury by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mercury systems builds cell-based systems and add-in boards that cost several thousand dollars, while the PS3 will cost a few hundred. Why the discrepancy in prices?

    Are there any cell-based systems that are cheap, aside from the PS3?

  100. Giving up on Sony. by Buzzwang · · Score: 1

    I gave up on Sony long ago.

    Rarely do I find a television show that I watch or might watch that is somehow involved with Sony, same goes with movies though they are more prominent. At least I go to matinee shows and save a few extra dollars when I do go to the movies.

    I don't own a PS or PSP, nor do I plan to. I bought an Xbox and then find just a few short months later that the next version is coming out in another year or so, and suddenly you can't find games for the original anymore. Sony is mucht eh same in that regard. I'm not going to shell out money every few years for a new console just to play the new games when my PC does just as good a job, I already own it, and it's much easier to upgrade.

    Further, Sony has no hold over my home. So far as I can recall, I own no Sony products other than a few CD's and maybe 5 or 6 DVD's. I think I have some appliances and such that may have Sony hardware in them, but they are not Sony branded (like a laptop CD drive or something similar).

    Sony hasn't been one of my favorite companies for a few years, and ranks right down their with US West/Qwest Communications, CitiFinancial, and TCF Banks and Mortgage. They're all horrid and they just don't see it, even when customers start flooding to other providers/businesses/sources for the same things, or drop that service or device out of their lives all together. I am on such person, which is why I don't have a home phone (Qwest) and my home mortgage is no longer with TCF even though I have a slightly higher interest rate now than before. As it turns out, my new vehicle ended up getting financed through Citi, though I'm already in process of moving that to my credit union instead.

    Regardless, Sony need not rule our lives or even live in a portion of it. They have no hold on me, and I'm not missing anything yet. My wife feels the same way, as do a number of my geek friends and their friends since they've all been bitten by Sony at some point or other in the last few years, and word of mouth alone is making them change their minds. They found out about this and started raising hell all over again.

    Boycott Sony? Already have, and will continue to do so.

    --
    Things you can say to your dog that you can't say to a girl: "How about a nice bone?"
  101. avg age = 14 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    okay, great so you want to boycott sony for differential pricing in a global market. Good. I agree, other people would agree, though not all. You have the following to do:
    1) you sound 14 and totally pissed, for the next 10 minutes. Make a postit on your frigde that reads: "Is it 2010 yet or has Sony allowed single pricing? if not hate sony more."
    2) you need to actually find what makes sony the most money, and avoid it.
    3) you need to tell people who arrn't on slashdot about your boycott
    4) you should convince everyone, remember that they don't hate sony. Work through it with logic.
    5) there will be a lot of people you can't convince; how can you marginalize them.

    okay. so that's not easy; hopefully you'll stop reading slashdot; turn off the PC and start phoning people, and writing letters to others, and informing retailers that they're about to be stuck in the middle and you're not sorry etc.

  102. No Choice? by tsanth · · Score: 1

    I'm curious as to why you need an HD-DVD player.

    It seems to me that you actually have at least a couple choices: you can choose to defer your entertainment for a while or you can choose to just not upgrade to HD-DVD.

    1. Re:No Choice? by Warlock7 · · Score: 1

      because microsoft told him so...

    2. Re:No Choice? by iainl · · Score: 1

      Ah, both you and the other person replying have misunderstood me (given that, it's probably my fault).

      I merely mean that I decided on going the Microsoft 360 route after the last batch of Sony PR mess, coupled with the news that most of the PS3 titles I was interested have been announced for the 360 as well. I'd also decided that HD-DVD made more sense than Blu-Ray, and so the add-on HD-DVD player is a relative bargain at precisely a tenth of the price of the standalone Panasonic BR player.

      i.e. I don't have a choice about whether to boycott Sony and Blu-Ray because I now can't afford them after going down the other route. Not that I don't have a choice about whether to ignore the new generation of machines completely. Although, strictly speaking, I don't have a choice about that either unless you've got a spare time machine I could borrow.

      I've got a rather nice HDTV (made by Sony, ironically enough) and I can quite easily appreciate the improvement in image quality that HD-DVD offers over normal DVD. I think it's worth £129.99 for the player, and roughly a £2 surcharge on disc prices. If you don't, I'm not going to force you to get one.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
  103. Boycott by C4st13v4n14 · · Score: 0

    Those mother fuckers. I can't even think of anything intelligent to say because I'm too fucked off.

  104. Re:AND YET YOU HAVEN'T CANCELLED YOUR PS3 PREORDER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course not, I never made one. And I never will :-)

  105. Sony... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

    Wii wiill wiimember!

  106. Oh Please by CrackJeason · · Score: 1

    Oh please am I the only one with any sense. For years Lik-Sang was going downhil, and yes I ahve ordered many of thigns from them. Alot of there customers got shafted many times cus they didn't have what they had advertised on there site. I remember many times that I went to order something and it was not available. So only blaming Sony like everyone can only do make you just as bad as you think Sony is. Don't blame a another company for anothers failure. I actually wish some fools would try to boycott Sony. All that will do is bring more business. Remeber when EA was in the news for over working there staff, people boycotted and refused to buy EA games; what did that do, in crease the sales of EA games. So yes flood Sony with you whining so that the execs can read it and laugh as the PS3 takes over the market share for console sales.

    1. Re:Oh Please by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      funny your the only post accusing Lik-sang of shafting customers, while 99% of the thread praised them on how good they where and many bought multiple things from them.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  107. European Courts? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    I wonder how this would stand up if all the grey imports got together and took Sony to the European courts. Isn't price discrimination meant to be illegal by European law?

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:European Courts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Price discrimination between EU member states is illegal. Price discrimination between EU and non-EU states is all right, as far as the EU is concerned.

  108. Re:Big Companies Suck - Here's Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its *WOOOSSH*

    and it is the sound of joke fast over your head

  109. Stop it Sony. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is, in plain and simple terms, complete and utter bullshit.

    As a consumer, as an ex-sony fanboi, I am hurt.

    I don't want to pay for rootkits. I don't want to pay to be treated like a criminal. I don't want to pay $599USD for a games console that some of my favorite brands are exclusively using to release their software. I'm sick of release dates being pushed back, and lies fed to the consumer.

    I need help, we all need to help ourselves and our fellow consumers.

    stopitsony.org - Just registered, will be online very soon as a Blog and Forum intended to organize the masses of enlightened consumers into showing the unenlightened ones - and Sony - that this sort (or any sort) of corporate assault and malice is not acceptable, and we as consumers will not stand for it.

    This is a plea to get involved. Let your opinions be known. Supply addresses for well worded letters to be sent to. Organize petitions outside your local EB Games. Tell your friends, your rich uncle that buys overpriced Sony televisions and stereos, anyone that cares.

  110. I hope they patented this by EvilMoose · · Score: 1

    Did Sony patent the idea of suing a company from so many countries at once? I hope they did because it's a wonderful idea to take out competitors.

  111. No Kicking, Lots of Screaming by docrmc · · Score: 1

    Oh, mighty, all-platform, light gun... how bittersweet thine existence. That thy knowest of thou, yet ne'er knowest thou. Thy patter, in the distance. Retreated from mine ear, hast thou. Return, sweet Lik-sang. Return!

    --
    "Moral indignation is just jealousy with a halo."
  112. I'm continuing my boycott. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have disliked Sony for a long time because of their unwillingness to adopt to widely spread standards. Instead they fight to spread their property standards (memory stick, DVD+r, beta max, blu-ray etc).

    Thees fights damage the consumers. For example, how much longer did it take for DVD-recorders to become common in PC's due to the war between DVD+r and DVD-r?

    This is just another argument for me to continue my boycott against Sony.

  113. Not a boycotter, but not much a buyer not. by Aladrin · · Score: 1

    I don't see a boycott going anywhere on this. But it definitely is NOT going to help their sales.

    I was on the fence for the PS3... I'm the type that buys all the consoles eventually. Now... I don't know that I want a Sony console, no matter WHAT games come out for it. I have a 360, and I'll have a Wii... But I don't think I'll go for a PS3.

    I'm even seriously considering dumping my PSP now. I rarely play it anyway, and it's been forever since they released a game I'd consider buying.

    It's going to mean I miss out on the Final Fantasy series from here out. And that saddens me greatly. And other games like Okami and Katamari Damacy, since Playstation has been the console that small companies develop for... But maybe they'll change. Maybe. I suspect there'll be enough games on the other 2 consoles and PC that I won't miss it too much.

    Wow. It's hard for me to imagine disliking Sony more than Microsoft. Amazing.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:Not a boycotter, but not much a buyer not. by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Ditto. I was going to wait to see how the PS3 performed, but now I'm just going to get the 360.

      Sony, do you have any idea how badly you have to screw up to make MS look good?

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  114. Not all their batteries are Sony. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Dell Inspiron 6400/E1505 has a Sanyo battery, and has been completely unaffected by the recalls.

  115. Advertisement by public utilities? by tepples · · Score: 1
    If you really wanted to make a dent, I would suggest writing the advertising SPONSORS of Sony related TV shows, like Jeopardy and The King of Queens and tell them you have discontinued buying their products until they quit sponsoring entertainment that Sony has ownership in.

    Is this practical if your local electric power company's advertisement and the advertisements of both the local telephone and cable companies play during one or more Sony TV shows on one or more networks? Should I stop wearing cotton clothes if National Cotton Council advertises on a Sony TV show? Where should one draw the line?

    1. Re:Advertisement by public utilities? by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Is this practical if your local electric power company's...

      I think common sense need to be inserted here. You can still contact your local power company if they advertise and ask them not to. I don't think anyone would have taken my statement as meaning you have to go buy a generator.

      I didn't even say quit buying anything, or limit it to companies that have products you normally purchase. I said to tell them you were going to stop buying their products. Just as if your name is Bob, and Tampax is the advertiser, I don't think you would tell them you are going to quit buying their tampons, but you can still write or email them. Or have your wife or girlfriend do so.

      So yes, it is practical if you apply a just a little common sense.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  116. Won't miss Lik Sang by Mr.+Samuel · · Score: 1

    Personally, I recall my experience with Lik Sang's customer service as awful. But with that said, it is unfortunate (though not surprising) that the import industry has taken such a blow.

    1. Re:Won't miss Lik Sang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I share your experience and must say that I'm happy to see them out of business.

  117. First bleem!, now Lik-Sang by drcagn · · Score: 1

    I always tried to avoid buying Sony products, but wouldn't restrict myself specifically from doing so, but after this, that's it. They destroyed one of my favorite gaming companies, bleem!, and now they've destroyed Lik-Sang. Screw them. I'm not buying another product by them.

    --
    Scorta futuere amo!
  118. Who the hell are you? by MicrosoftRepresentit · · Score: 0

    And what exactly makes you less of a sheep then everyone else in America? Is it because you pirate your music and movies instead of paying for them?

    1. Re:Who the hell are you? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      dont forget software... you did not metion that.

      OOOH! I also voilate EULAS and PATENTS too. I made a hardware device I own (how dare I think I own it!) do somethign different....

      Oh and I also beat kittens and feed puppies to alligators.

      I have to go now, I am tossing some endangered species in to a wood chipper in a few minutes....

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  119. Lik-Sang e-mails being sent out by nhz · · Score: 1

    From: info@lik-sang.com
    Sender: cancellation@lik-sang.com
    Subject: "Order cancelled due to out of business"
    Body:
    Dear valued customer,

    unfortunately, Lik Sang is forced to close its virtual doors for good. This comes as a consequence of the several legal actions brought on us by Sony. For more information on the situation, please point your browser to the following link:

    http://www.lik-sang.com/news.php?artc=3901

    Therefore, as soon as humanly possible, we will cancel all existing orders, including yours, and issue refunds where necessary.

    Please note that it may take anywhere from a few days up to a week or two for refunds to be processed by PayPal, your bank or your credit card company, so please don't worry if you don't see it immediately on your balance statement. You can rest assured that Lik-Sang is monitoring the situation closely with all involved parties. No single customer will be caught in the crossfire of this ordeal.

    We are sorry to have to go, and we wish to thank you sincerely your support over the past decade.

    Warm regards and a big THANK YOU from the entire Hong Kong crew.

    Team Lik-Sang

  120. Damn! I tried so hard to boycott Sony... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    ...but they make the best 1080p HDTV and that's what I bought. If I wasn't already feeling guilty about it, this makes me feel even worse seeing as I made use of Lik Sang myself. Whether or not I buy a PS3 is irrelevant, they probably made more profit from that TV that they'd ever have made out of PS3 games bought by me. Oh! Woe is me! I'm certain to end up in one of the lower rungs of Hades now.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  121. PS3 / PSP aren't must-haves for me anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have no intention of buying a PS3 anyway. At least not until the console goes through its third or fourth price reduction. When it hits $249 I'll start considering it. Until then, there isn't really enough utility for me in the console to justify the high cost. I'll be getting a Wii + Zelda & Red Steel this Christmas and be damned happy with it.

    Sony's marketing and legal strategies do boggle the mind of the casual observer. Sony's whole $600 is too cheap for a PS3 combined with their accusations towards Microsoft and Nintendo of overcharging reminds me of John Romero's "Suck it Down, Bitches!" campaign for Daikatana. Sony telling gamers that we're simply going to take it up the ass and like it simply aint gonna win a lot of converts.

    After ION Storm imploded, wasn't Romero forced to sell his fancy sports car? Maybe something similar will happen to Phil Harrison & Ken Kutaragi. We can only hope!

  122. change of mind by Ishkibble · · Score: 1

    looks like my plans for the PS3 are out the window and just 15 minuts ago i would of been ready to slap down 600+ for one of thoes babies but my pocket book just closed to sony

  123. Mod parent: Not a troll, just opinion. by ShadowsHawk · · Score: 1

    Some $ony fanboy must be having a bad day. Sorry that he took it out on you.

  124. Sony Boycott by asleep79 · · Score: 1

    I for one will never give any money, service, advertising or other support to Sony or any company to which they are related. It's one thing to do "good business" and grow your company, expand your products etc. But when domineering scum like the Sony execs in charge of this attrocity let their soulless greed blind them to the consequences on the world of their actions they don't deserve to have a business any longer. A business, especially a gigantic one like Sony, should want to not only create profit for themselves but do so by making the world a better place. Products and services are about making life better, more entertaining or any of a number of other positive words. When the company, however, lets greed make them hurt the world rather than help it then, just like any destructive delinquint child, they should be disciplined. Boycott Sony.

    --
    -asleep
  125. Need tissue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares ?

    L-S broke contract, was warned, had more than a year to fix it and didn't. Not only did they not honor the contract, they did so very publicly; they flaunted it in Sony's face. If I was Sony (or any other console maker, ftm) I would do the same thing. In fact, I might even seek to do more damage than Sony did. boo hoo hoo for the losers.

    Let's see how far any business gets by refusing to honor contracts. The only negative responses I've seen here are chronic complainer underdog types.

    Let's see - how many different creative ways can you sell the banned products anyway ?
    - Sell to another vendor not in US but close by, Canada eh?. Let ATI brand it and sell it to US, L-S still makes profit.
    - Create new subsidiary, sell product to sub, sub calls product something else and sells to US. L-S still makes profit.
    - .. I bet there are plenty of creative legal solutions around the contract rule that Sony complains about; there exist corp. lawyers can make the product sell in the US despite what Sony does.

    Instead, L-S throws up arms and says, "poor me, big bad bully come beat me up!" They make me sick, they deserve what they got and a whole lot worse. Pathetic losers.

  126. I have boycotted Sony since 1997 by Ugot2BkidNme · · Score: 1

    Sony Is crap they have been crap for a while I woudl rather save my money and spend it on somethign cheaper and more well made which is pretty much everything.

    Oh and By the Way Boycotting Sony also means boycotting their games as well *COUGH* Everquest *COUGH*

    Anyways I haven't looked back and haven't really cared since I did it.

    So what if I miss a few stupid movies.(I can still catch them when they come on cable since I am not really paying for them)
    So what if I miss out on a few decent games that only come out for Playstation(and when I say few I mean few)

    I don't seem to miss it and my pocket book really thanks me.

  127. Re:AND YET YOU HAVEN'T CANCELLED YOUR PS3 PREORDER by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

    Ironically, my PS3 preorder has just been cancelled automatically - I had one with Lik-Sang since I'm in Europe and I could eBay a PS3 at a decent profit, but looks like Sony's not getting any of my money now.

  128. Missing something? by Makito · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm missing something but since this appears to be trade infraction at best, it doesn't seem to lead that Lik-Sang would need or could be forced to close. Sony suits were brought up in the UK so one would imagine, if Lik-Sang wanted they could simply fail to show up in court, default guilt, and therefor minimize financial impact. There upon, Lik-Sang could continue to conduct business as usual from HK and to all non-EU countries. Something smells fishy... either it's a PR stunt Or! creative business law aka close "Lik-Sang" and open new "Like-Sang" and resume business as usual until the next Sony suite.

  129. Here's the plan.... by pizzach · · Score: 1

    Okay everybody, I know how we can bring Sony down. It'll work much faster than boycotting. Now, I'm going to start a donation paypal account for people to contribute to. Using that money, I'll just continuously keep buying PS3s without getting any actually software or video. Heheheheh...this'll syphen away their bottom line...

    --
    Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    1. Re:Here's the plan.... by Blue+Fox+USA · · Score: 1

      Just don't buy anything from Sony...

  130. Re:BOYCOTT SONY! - Tried that, didn't work by AusIV · · Score: 1
    I tried to boycott sony for a while, but frankly I couldn't afford it. Try explaining to your girlfriend that you can't take her to see half the movies that come out because Sony is an evil company. Eventually she'll get fed up.

    Another place I found it difficult to avoid Sony was a field I didn't even know sony was in -- batteries. My college campus sells sony batteries. I can spend my campus dollars (which expire at the end of the semester) on Sony batteries, but not Energizer or Duracell. Since the campus dollars disappear at the end of the semester, I can basically get sony batteries at no cost, or get a ride off campus to go pay out the nose for another company's batteries.

    I do avoid Sony when I can. I bought a pair of really nice headphones last spring, and paid about $20 more for the Bose equivalent of something Sony made. When I buy CDs, I check the back to make sure it's not Sony BMG. I don't have a Playstation or PSP and probably never will. I'm avoiding BluRay, largely because of Sony's involvement.

    I also think this business about Lik-Sang is pretty crazy. I once bought some Nintendo Gameboy games from Japan months before the US release. When they came out in the US, I bought them again so I could read the text. I don't see how Sony is possibly losing money to Lik-Sang importing games.

    Yes, I would like to see a change in management at Sony, but frankly it's just not worth the cost of boycotting all of their products. If there were a large enough movement that Sony might actually take notice, I'd join in, but a few thousand nerds who take their business elsewhere (or nowhere) won't even be a blip on Sony's radar, so for now I avoid it when there's a decent alternative, but Sony still gets some of my business.

  131. Re:Would it be too harsh... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

    that shipment is likely to be on a massive container ship carrying merchandise from thousands of manufacturers.

    OTOH hiring someone to throw a handful of low level radioactive stones into the PS3 shipping container could delay things a bit while homeland security rips the whole thing apart looking for nuclear weapons.

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  132. As bad a deed as this is... by thekm · · Score: 1

    ...I wont be boycotting them. Killing a business like this really does suck in a big way, but I value Sony's fight against Microsoft to be more important. I instead ask that if you're buying a console next year, make it a PS3, or at the very least, a Wii... just not... you know... that other console.

    Sony does do this type of thing anywhere near as much as Microsoft, and I resent MS literally trying to buy the game market... so, don't be boycotting Sony... for I think that in the long run it would be cutting your nose to spite your face.

    If Sony loses the console war, all diversity in the market will be gone, and will effect far more companies than just lik-sang.

  133. lik-sang .. hahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lik-wang has always been more popular anyway

  134. Wiigion lockout by tepples · · Score: 1
    Imagine that Nintendo buys up the remains of Lik-Sang [...] Imagine that. Buy any game you want in any part of the world when it comes out.

    If Nintendo wanted this, then it would have been more explicit about Wii region coding or the lack thereof.

  135. My Boycott Checklist by nuintari · · Score: 1

    Lets see, can I boycott Sony? I bet I can!

            * James Bond: Casino Royale - this may surprise you, but not all geeks think bond is the shit, I have never seen a Bond movie, not about to break that streak now.
            * Open Season: I don't even know this is, but it sounds like a show about rednecks shooting deer and calling it manly.
            * Monster House: Ooooooo, that sounded sooooooo entertaining.
            * Spiderman 3: *yawn*
            * Stranger Than Fiction: Wait, they made this movie? It _is_ stranger....
            * The Da Vinci Code: Book sucked, movies are always shitty compared to books, therefore, the movie will blow an elephant.
            * Zoom: HAHAHAHA! Please tell me, no one actuallhy paid money to see this, or wasted a blank DVD to steal this?
            * The King of Queens: Yeah, a TV show about a big fat guy with a hot wife..... or did I mix that up with the other incredably insiteful and enjoyable show about a big fat guy with a hot wife?
            * JEOPARDY!: Alright, I found one thing I might miss, did I mention I don't have cable, or dish?
            * Wheel of Fortune: What am I? 70 years old?
            * Ripley's Believe It or Not!: I can't believe this is still on the air.
            * Dragon Tales: Again, wtf is this? I realize not having a TV limits my exposure, but wtf is this?
            * The Boondocks: You kidding? When I go someplace, and this show is on, I hurl large, dense objects at the screen.

    Okay, looks like I am all set for my Sony Boycott. I am changing absolutely none of my spending habits. Oh, and I don't own any sony hardware either.

    Now, would I have cared to bother with any of this had a boycott required me to do so? Not bloody likely, I just to point out that Sony's products suck.

    --

    --Nuintari

    slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.

  136. Re:Kill Sony, buy a PS3 AND RUN LINUX by 2008 · · Score: 1

    Yellow Dog Linux is coming out for the PS3. Buying one and using it exclusively as a linux PC would work pretty well if you want to cost Sony some cash.
    And FreeCiv is probably better than most of the launch games. :)

    --
    I quit!
  137. Judges are less bought and paid for by tepples · · Score: 1
    it sucks but that is the legislator's fault. There seems to be the strange view often expressed on /. that it's up to judges to fix bad laws.

    Might it have something to do with 1. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka and similar judicial review cases in the United States, and 2. the fact that judges are generally less subject to influence by campaign contributors than legislators?

  138. PS3 Marketplace by tepples · · Score: 1

    Buying used games won't be profitable if the majority of your favorite franchises move to node-locked sales over PS3 Marketplace. It's about time Wii switch to different franchises.

  139. Nooooooo! by 56ksucks · · Score: 1

    Lik-Sang is awesome!! I can't believe this crap. We need to write sony an angry letter.

    --

    ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

  140. Sony are in "screw the customers" mode now. by jonwil · · Score: 1

    Most companies realize that if you give the customers what they want, they will continue to give you money. Dell knows that if they keep making the kinds of computers they are making now, people will keep buying Dells. Walmart knows that if they keep offering stuff really really cheap, people will keep comming back to walmart instead of going elsewhere.

    Sony on the other hand has fallen into a trap that a number of companies are in (or have been in) where making huge profits is more important that doing what the customers want (and therefore getting their customers to come back).
    Most of the companies that follow the "screw the customers" model have a monopoly (or something close enough to one) and can get away with it since there is really no other choice (for example, Microsoft, Verizon etc) but Sony is probobly going to find that it wont work for them in this case.

  141. SONY.. by nikostheater · · Score: 1

    Well,i for sure dislike them every day more and more... I think that they lost touch with reality completely..

    --
    Bill Gates said:"I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine" My favorite number is 09 F9 11 02 9D 74
  142. Sony's Response by miller60 · · Score: 3, Informative
    Sony has provide a statement to GamesIndustry.biz in which it proves it can be a sore winner by bashing Lik-Sang:


    "Lik-Sang did not contest this case (i.e. they did not turn up and therefore incurred no legal costs). We have been awarded substantial costs against Lik-Sang which have not been paid," the statement claims. "We would therefore strongly deny that our actions have had anything to do with this website closing (we assume the legal entity is still trading), and would suggest that this release is sour grapes on behalf of Lik-Sang which is aimed to belittle Sony Computer Entertainment and the British judicial system that found against them."

    The mention of "substantial costs" suggests the size of the judgment may have been what caused Lik-Sang to close its doors.

    1. Re:Sony's Response by DrXym · · Score: 1
      The mention of "substantial costs" suggests the size of the judgment may have been what caused Lik-Sang to close its doors.

      More likely it's because Lik-Sang has a distribution warehouse in Germany somewhere that "caches" items for speedier delivery to the EU. If Sony have been awarded damages in the UK they could probably go after their EU operation to recover that money. Lik-Sang have just decided to cut and run.

      It's not the first time they've been embroiled in battles with the console makers. Nintendo, Sony AND Microsoft have all been involved in lawsuits against them before now. Why pick on Sony? Nintendo or Microsoft won't be shedding any tears that Lik-Sang have gone. They might be a little bemused to watch Slashdot fanbois have a go at Sony for it, but they'd be as glad if their own suits had shut them down.

  143. Good Will??? by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
    Many thanks to Sony for ruining it for the rest of us. I hope that your business model makes up for the customer goodwill you're lighting on fire today.

    Sorry, but Sony ran out of customer goodwill long ago. The flames you see are from the piles of returned batteries, combined with marketing spin for an updraft.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  144. SONY, rootkit vendor to the world! by HiThere · · Score: 1

    Sony continues to live down to it's reputation.

    I remember when the name meant technical excellence. Pity. And it's taken less than a decade to come to this: the lawsuit model of business. Well, may their prospects be as bright as those of SCO.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  145. I bet you run really fast and jump really high ... by glrotate · · Score: 1

    with those $100+ shoes.

    Sucker.

  146. Thank you Lik-Sang, and goodbye. by j0se_p0inter0 · · Score: 1

    While I was living in China I was having trouble finding all the new PSP games that were coming out. I ended up ordering several games and some screen protectors through Lik-Sang. They were quick to ship and had great customer service. When one of my packages was held by the Chinese government for inspection, Lik-Sang notified me before the shipping company did. I don't fully understand why Sony would take such heavy-handed actions against a reputable internet retailer who helps gamers around the world buy Sony products? In some parts of the world it's hard to find games even if they are sold there, Lik-Sang was providing a great service to those who were in such situations. Oh well, one more reason I won't be buying their macro-priced PS3. Sony, did you really think this would help you in a PR sense? I hope you get your ass handed to you by the Wii and the 360. Oh, and to hell with Bluray...I won't be jumping on that ship either.

  147. Like Apple? by NineNine · · Score: 1

    Acting like criminals? Oh, you mean like Apple selling products with viruses pre-loaded, and saying it's MS's fault? Very few companies handle this kind of thing correctly. Tylenol did in the 1980's with the poisoning scare. Most companies act the way that Sony and Apple did.

    1. Re:Like Apple? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1
      Acting like criminals? Oh, you mean like Apple selling products with viruses pre-loaded, and saying it's MS's fault? Very few companies handle this kind of thing correctly. Tylenol did in the 1980's with the poisoning scare. Most companies act the way that Sony and Apple did.
      Uh, Apple doesn't get excused either. But in a way, Jobs is right. Windows viruses are Microsoft's fault.
  148. Doing my part by cloneofsnake · · Score: 0

    I own about 5 original PS + PS2 games! I'm what Sony calls, a pirate.

  149. Dont worry. I'll buy stuff for you. by NineNine · · Score: 1

    Don't worry. I'm still getting a PS3 with all of the bells and whistles. I don't know who who what "Lik Sang" is, nor do I care. There's absolutely no (well thought out) reason, that I can see, to boycott Sony.

      Now Apple, that's another story, altogether. Between their sweatshops and the price gouging and their blaming MS for virus-ridden iPods, I won't spend a nickel on any Apple products.

  150. OT: Sunglasses by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    I wear prescription sunglasses, which cost a small fortune, stand up to anything, and have to be comfortable because I can't see shit without them.

    Just out of curiosity, where do you get them, or what brand are they? (The frames, particularly, but lenses also if they're not from the same company and you know.) Do you know the manufacturer or anything else?

    I'm in the market for Rx sunglasses and I've been holding off because I just don't know how to make sure that I get good ones. One of the reasons people continue to buy brand-name goods is because it's a known quantity (and quality). Oakleys probably aren't great, but they're not total crap either; in the absence of any other information I'd probably end up buying them because at least I know they're "better than the spinny rack."

    I have been thinking of WileyX frames and lenses because they have a decent reputation among the Rx-wearing police and military folks I've talked to (they've been described to me as "Oakleys, but with balls"), but I'd be interested to hear what some other people's experiences are.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:OT: Sunglasses by general+scruff · · Score: 1

      One Word: Contacts.

      I have found the biggest issue with RX sunglasses is that the frame and the lense don't match up. This causes many problems down the road. I have had two pair of RX rayban's and both are pretty much junk. My plastic pair had no constitution, and would stretch out and fall off my face. The metal ones just fell apart after about 3 months of use(the lenses would fall out, I would put them back in, etc).

      With contacts you can get a pair of sunglasses with lenses that were meant for the frame.

      I don't hold my experience against Rayban, as I'm sure there were other factors that lead up their failure...

      P.S. Contacts usually end up being cheaper than glasses in the long run. You can get about 6 months worth of 2 Week Lenses for about $40-US. They also have them for astigmatism, and are incredibly comfortable. Also, driving at night, you have NO GLARE!!

      Hope this helps!

      --
      As a rule, I never trust dark brown ketchup.
    2. Re:OT: Sunglasses by iainl · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, my Oakley Rx pair cost me so much it would have been far cheaper to just get contacts. But, given that I'm too much of a wuss to put a bit of plastic in my eye, I think they've been worth the money. I went with the metal A-wire, rather than the really silly shapes they do, though. The enhanced peripheral vision is a godsend when skiing, and trying to keep track of where all the nutcase snowboarders are going, as they're usually blind on their off side.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    3. Re:OT: Sunglasses by nuintari · · Score: 1

      I buy whatever is good looking on the quality rack at Lenscrafters. I shop from them, because I usually only need new glasses when I have destroyed my last pair in some hysterical accident. The hour delivery will cost you another 50 bucks, but it is worth the speediness to me.

      All places that sell glasses have a shitty quality rack. Avoid these like the plague, they are for people who need insurance to cover the lenses. Generally, they are flimsey, and will be destroyed in 6-12 months. Pay over one hundred bucks for the frames alone, and they will last through anything. I sleep with mine on all the time.

      All those espensive features they sell, snug fit, ultra lightweight but still durable frames, polarized lenses? All very much worth it. Course, all that will run 350+ after you add in the lenses.

      They really don't seem to make quality glasses for people that do not need them.

      --

      --Nuintari

      slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.

  151. higher "pay standards" == higher prices by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    Sure the CEOs could take a cut and pass the savings down the line but that just isn't going to happen. CEOs make X times as much as the average employee but there are usually more than X times as many employees as CEOs.

    What always happens however, when the low to middle class gets a government mandated pay raise (hiking minimum wage), is that prices go up because everything now costs more to make. Machines replace humans because machines are cheaper. Humans used to be cheaper but they kept demanding a government mandated raise. Now those people get nothing and a machine is doing their job and they have to find something else to do.

    The better solution is to keep minimum wage down to keep prices down and if you want to go the "high road" move up pay so you can afford the goods that you couldn't afford as a minimum wage lacky.

    Minimum wage jobs are for teenagers who can afford the "high road" on minimum wage because they don't have bills to pay. They do the low paying jobs to learn work skills. If you are trying to live off of minimum wage then something is seriously wrong. Society is stupid however and has completely forgotten what minimum wage was for: to prevent sweatshops. Not to live off of.

    If the minimum wage keeps going up you're going to need a degree to justify being hired to flip burgers at such a high hourly wage. And either only one $20 an hour (about what it takes to live comfortably in a city) person is going to be doing the work of 4 people (so 3 people are fired/never hired so you can be paid) or the price of your food is going to be 4 times as much. I can just imagine having to pay $10 for a Whopper.

    Cheap labor == cheap products. Cheap labor is for teenagers. You should have stopped making minimum wage long before you were solely responsible for living expenses. If you just can't move up then that's life. You're not entitled to anything. You have to work for it.

    1. Re:higher "pay standards" == higher prices by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      If you just can't move up then that's life. You're not entitled to anything. You have to work for it.

      But what about all those people who can't move up regardless of how much they work, because of the completely insufficient public education they received?

      If the minimum-wage-raiser-uppers really wanted wages to increase they'd kick out the teachers' unions and improve the schools. Then people could make more because they wouldn't graduate from high-school being illiterate.

      But no, they'd rather mandate a minimum wage increase and pretend that money appears out of nowhere.

      Ultimately, the problem with entitlements is that unless you make it really unpleasant to receive, people will expect it. Since the sense of shame died after a long illness about 10 years ago, there is nothing left to prevent many people from just giving up and going on the dole. Improving the safety net just attracts more people who don't need it.

      Wages wouldn't be so low if workers were worth more (and we weren't depressing wages by letting tens of millions of illegals in the country who can undercut people who pay taxes, etc), but the education system seems more interested in making kids feel good about themselves, thinking white men had little influence in American history or teaching them to put on condoms than to give them the ability to be productive citizens.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  152. Don't buy any more Sony Products by MrJerryNormandinSir · · Score: 1

    get the word out, no more sony products! don't buy the PS3, spread the word! Sony DVD players are not what they used to be anyway.
    My sony dvd player died when it was not even 1 year old. No more! I bought a cheapo from radio shack and it's been working fine for 4 years now. No more SONY. No More SONY. Lik Sang was a cool company. I hope tehy bounce back from this and start something else up.

  153. A boycott is inefficient, use YOUTUBE by Archfeld · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and fight them with satire humor and MASS PUBLICITY. Someone talented needs to make a funny video that will get 10 million hits from google. THAT will hit Sony where it hurts, in the AD CAMPAIGN. They make money by default, give everyone somthing to laugh at them for and they will make another brand the COOL one and SONY will feel it. Not only would a VIRAL video hit them here in the US, but world wide exposure. The thing the CORPS fear the MOST IN THE WORLD IS INFORMATION. It is how they control us, using their game against them is the MOST EFFECTIVE TOOL.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:A boycott is inefficient, use YOUTUBE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BUAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA *cough*, I love you slashbots and other "ZOMG $ON¥ IS TEH EVIL" non-Sony console/handheld fanboys.

      While I don't trust Sony, I don't think I would trust the "full story" & "truth" from someone who got sued over selling modded systems and gameboy flash carts.....

    2. Re:A boycott is inefficient, use YOUTUBE by Wogan · · Score: 1

      Post above me is 2x as underground for using a fixed width font. Fight the power!

  154. Surprising that the U.K. perpetuates it. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    I definitely agree with you; what I don't understand is what part of U.K. law Sony used to go after Lik-Sang and other importers.

    It's pretty clear that grey-market importation is legal in the United States (heck, companies like B&H Photo do it all the time; sometimes you can even choose between the Grey and U.S. version of the same item), so I don't think the same thing could happen here unless Sony really wanted to buy Congress. Not that we didn't get close -- the USSC decision was 5-4 in favor of the gray market's "parallel importation," so it could have been different.

    What's very odd to me is that people in the U.K. seem to tolerate their laws being used against them in such a self-defeating fashion. I was stunned when I went to England last, how much everything cost there even compared to Europe. It's bizarre that such a situation is allowed to exist given the ease of moving goods across the Channel. It's only through the tacit approval of a lot of people in the U.K. that this situation remains. If I were a U.K. politician, this seems like it would be a no-brainer issue to jump on. Nobody likes knowing that they're getting screwed by a bunch of foreigners, but yet as a country they're practically bending over and asking for it.

    Maybe there's some benefit to the laws that are being (ab)used this way that I'm not seeing, but really it just seems like the U.K.-ers get hosed as a result of their own legal system.

    Is there some sort of benefit to the U.K. of the laws prohibiting parallel importation? Or is the government there even more thoroughly bought by the multinational corporations than it is here?

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Surprising that the U.K. perpetuates it. by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      It's not so much a UK decision as an EU decision. If someone tried to sell PSPs in France, they'd get the same thing. I suspect it's a big EU thing because quite a lot of Europe relies on industries like fashion and perfume.

      The problem is that it's not that big a political deal, although there was a case involving Tesco/Levi's which did get some publicity.

      Most people have no support for these suppliers. You sell your goods to someone, it's not yours any more. You gave away your property rights when you sold it. The idea that people can control what people do after sale is anti-free market.

      Incidentally, the UK, in 2001 tried to exert some political pressure against the Trademarks Directive. So, basically, the UK government doesn't support it, but the courts enforce it. Nice to be running our own country :(

  155. Columbia/Tristar is all good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Substituting movie X from Sony with movie Y from Columbia/Tristar would not be pointless because of non-fungibility, it would be pointless because Columbia/Tristar IS Sony.

    Stick with Disney...unless you are boycotting them because, you know, most of their video games suck.

  156. I hate Sony by horcy · · Score: 1

    It all started with George Michael. S*ny Raping him with a f*ck*d up record deal =( But took a nice shot at them with the chrome headset reflecting Fony. I hated Sony, now I hate them even more, because I ordered a lot from Lik-Sang. It was an excelent online game store. Their monthly news letter was ver informative.

    bah

    --
    Check my site: http://pixel.pagina.nl
  157. I call bullshit. by John+Pfeiffer · · Score: 1

    I purchased my Ceramic White PSP Gigapack from Lik-Sang about this time last year. Normally, I import through Play-Asia, but they had more of the accessories I wanted in stock at the time. Lik-Sang closing its doors is a shame, but beyond that, Sony's claims are a sham. They claim to be protecting consumers...by denying them what they want. You don't import a game or console by ACCIDENT. You do it because you want it. Why don't consumers have the right to buy whatever the hell version they want? And the other parts of this claim are just ludicrous. The PSP, for instance, ships with a universal charger. If the charger doesn't carry the proper certifications (Which it does), that seems more like a Sony problem...since it's the same damned power supply they sell in EVERY LOCALE. Also, Lik-Sang provides with the merchandise, paperwork describing the certifications the product carries, for customs reasons.

    I imported my PSP for two reasons: I liked the white one, and it wasn't out in the states. And I already had a bunch of anime on UMD (Included as a bonus with DVDs) that were Region 2. It made no sense for me not to import, and in fact, even if the white PSP had been available in the US at the time, and putting aside the UMD regions...I would have still paid a (slight) premium to import it. All my games are Japanese, and the US accessories suck. (My Hori Portable Pouch Style beats it all for PSP carrying.) Is Sony saying I don't deserve to buy their products?

    When I get a Playstation 3-- which I am still going to do despite Sony's bullshit --it will be a Japanese model. If I have to buy it in fecking Akiba myself because they've shut down every importer, so be it. While I'm there, I'll pay the SCEJ offices a visit (Shopping bag still in-hand) and ask them about it.

    --

    Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
  158. Waaaa Waaa Waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like that would do much of anything, and besides, I bet a good ammount of you pirated it anyways.

    And as for those saying "SEND HIM 5BUX," yeah right.

  159. Re: "Does not conform to CD Audio...." by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    I don't know about the USA release but my Canadian release here has both a CD and a DVD. No "Compact Disc Digital Audio" logo anywhere, though. On the other hand, my Mac didn't have any trouble at all with the "CD" and acted as if it were a regular audio CD. No idea if it causes any problem on Windows systems.

  160. Lik-Who? by pkcs11 · · Score: 0

    I buy games from regular stores or typical online e-tailers (best-buy etc).
      Is Lik-Sang really vital to the distribution of games? Why has Sony sued them? Is there any validity to Sony's lawsuits?
      It always hurts to see the little guy crushed, but was this a warranted lawsuit?

    --
    "I have an odd craving to whisper about those few frightful hours in that ill-rumored and evilly shadowed seaport of dea
  161. UK laws affect HK? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My question is:

    Why the hell does a Hong Kong-based company give a rat's ass about what a UK court says?

  162. Strange Slashdot double morality by Pecisk · · Score: 1

    Disclaimer: I don't play games for some 3 years. Never had console. And possibly will never have.

    It is your rights to call a boycott, giving fingers to Sony, claiming it was illegal, saying that they will pay for their lesson.

    But listen.

    They did EVERYTHING legal. They protected THEIR trademark. For your information, all consoles, mobile phones, etc. electronic stuff should qualified to be used in EU and UK. Yeah, you can cry that Sony will rise prices for EU units, but blame them about THAT, but not about trademark.

    They should be responsible about stuff what is sold under their trademark and name in Europe. Otherwise they can get in very hot water and no thousand geeks will help them.

    Anyway, go back to your computers, consoles, CD players, tvs which propably has lot of Sony stuff inside. Yeah, I know, it is ironic and kinda sad, but Sony is BIG. Very BIG.

    And believe me, PS3 will succeed. Again, how ironic.

    Next time Apple will protect their trademark, you will trash all your iPods too? And how about Windows, maybe after such ignorance from Bill Gates and Balmer you should dump it? No? Need to do everyday's work?

    --
    user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  163. Re:Kill Sony, buy a PS3 AND RUN LINUX by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

    There's also the fine cause of Folding@Home, and this time next year there will be plenty of used games and movies available.

    --
    Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
  164. Quit the BS Lik-Sang doesn't deserve any sympathy by DrXym · · Score: 1

    I don't know why everyone is whining about Sony. Nintendo busted Lik-Sang for selling Gameboy copy devices. MS, Sony AND Nintendo busted them for modchips. Sony busted them for grey imports. Fact is that every console maker had the knives out for Lik-Sang. It may well be that they were a decent e-tailer (they were when I ordered some stuff) but they sure as hell rubbed up the console makers the wrong way. I guarantee that none of them feels the slightest sympathy for Lik-Sang. If it wasn't Sony it would have been Microsoft or Nintendo. Quit ragging with the "Boycott Sony" bullshit unless you intend to boycott the other games consoles too.

  165. Re:Kill Sony, buy a PS3 AND RUN LINUX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    True, but the second hand market still indirectly puts money in their pockets - people pay more for games because they know they can sell them and recover some of that money, a lot of people treat buying games as long-term rental.

  166. Available now in China by Noodles_HK · · Score: 1

    First of all, I can't believe Lik-Sang would roll over for this... HK is no longer under British rule, so unless the Chinese Government tells them to stop, Sony can sod off. Second, the amount of questionable retailers in China is simply astonishing. Lik-Sang should open up shop as Li-Song in China with a copy of their customer database.

  167. Ah-ha. by tsanth · · Score: 1

    Duly noted; I did indeed misunderstand.

    For whatever reason, I somehow equated "HD-DVD" with "Sony" when I should have been binding "Blu-Ray" to "Sony" instead.

    I suppose that in your case, you really do now have no choice in your upgrade path.

  168. Bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You say "the cause" as though the guy was saying "The Cause" with a capital 'C'.

    The cause in this context would be that of boycotting Sony. They have been pulling the most inane crap over the last few years, the most important of which being the rootkit scandal (and, arguably, a less important matter being that of the blurb - do remember that's not the sole context in this thread anymore by the time the gp hit "submit").

    If you put a rootkit on a bunch of people's computers and this was exposed to the public, would you expect to get away without criminal charges?

    To me, a boycot is a good way of getting the ball rolling on imposing sanctions on Sony, and show that even the biggest megacorporation is not above moral responsibility. Hopefully the Law (or rather the laws of various countries) will come along and put some people in jail. In the meantime, kick them in the sack by denying them your part of the revenue stream.

  169. just make funny utube videos by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

    making fun of sony products, and spashing them to pieces

    100000 sony sux videos would make the point

    --
    Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  170. Research people! by TheSeer2 · · Score: 1

    Lik Sang claim to be out of business for defending the court case but they didn't show up at court ala the recent spamhaus case.

  171. Re:BOYCOTT SONY (Movies)! by Skevin · · Score: 1

    Are you trying to boycott their most entertaining movies, and yet don't want to give them your dollars? Just buy a ticket to another flick with a similar timeslot and hop into the one you're boycotting. This way, the theater doesn't lose out on your business (you paid your admission), but the figures come back to Sony as nada.

    SKC

    --
    "Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang
  172. Re:Quit the BS Lik-Sang doesn't deserve any sympat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's less "Sony is bad for suing Lik-Sang at all" and more "Sony is bad for suing them for more bullshitty reasons."

  173. Disney's No Good Either... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forget, we're boycotting Disney already because they keep getting copyright extended so the mouse doesn't become public domain... That's not a viable solution either. I think Time Warner is fairly independent and hasn't done anything extremely customer-hostile that really stands out, if you're looking for alternatives...

  174. sony should sue sony for selling blank media by AdamGott · · Score: 1

    I always find it funny that a corporation like Sony can go ahead and sue someone like Lik-Sang because the stuff that Lik-Sang sells can be (and is) used for pirating yet the Sony's of the world continue to sell blank media that can be (and is) used for pirating.

  175. What can we do to help Lik Sang? by Blue+Fox+USA · · Score: 1

    Besides boycotting Sony, maybe people could donate money to Lik Sang and buy some of those mugs and badge holders they sell and become a visible supporter of Lik Sang. Just a thought. ---- Khan: "I will leave you as you left me... stuck in the West without Lik Sang" Kirk: "KAHN!!!!!!!!!!!"

  176. dang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's too bad. No illegal importing for you. Looks like you need to burn the Sony witch. Anything that brings down teh mighty Soneh, huh?

  177. Thanks Sony by Colourspace · · Score: 1

    How do you feel about a $700 screw in you're coffin? PS when's Motorstorm?

  178. Want to hurt SONY? Buy USED kit by demo9orgon · · Score: 1

    I'll continue to buy used games and consoles.
    Of course I'm part of the disappearing middle-class so I'm really not eroding their bottom line any
    but if a majority of consumers opted to wait for used consoles I'm SONY would feel the love.

    Cheers

    --
    Every new form of media has it's own Requirimento
  179. Mod Parent Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, this got modded "Overrated"? Is it because he suggested to buy the PS3? Seems like we have fanboy moderators in our midst.

    I wonder if these fanboys are Xbox fanboys. If they are, then it would be ironic to buy 360s since Microsoft is still the evil corporation holding a monopoly on OSs.

  180. SOE doing the opposite of the parent company by Tinman_au · · Score: 1

    There is some classic irony here.

    Everquest 2:EoF (an expansion pack for the EQ2 game) isn't being released as a box set for the OS market. This means the ROTW (rest of the world) have to either get the digital download (if they don't care about all the usual extras that go with a boxed edition like collectables, maps, manuals, etc) or we have to import a boxed set from the US.

    Another irony is that over the years Sony has "leaned" on online retailers like EB, Amazon, et al so they won't ship to Australia (even though we have a FTA with the US), so we have to go to even extra effort to track down a smaller online retailer to get it sent here.

    Way to go Sony, your management is so incompetent they even fuck up fucking up, that's quite an achievement.

  181. Yes.. Boycott Sony. by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

    Even though there was no way that the UK/Euro govt. would have allowed the continuous sale of PS3's from Japan/America to be resold by a legit. online retailer thereby skipping out on import duties, customs regulations, and that bloody stupid VAT tax. Then there's the retailers themselves who would sue Sony, and depending on their contracts with them, possibly win. And then, of course, there's the fact that all the corps. besides Sony who push for seperate regions on movie materials would have formed a lynch mob. But this is /., so we'll just ignore any realities of the situation at hand.

  182. You have to not want things from bad people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuck sony. they're done, they have been for a while now. Nintendo is the only one left that focuses on innovation,and even they suck at it.

  183. "Boycott SONY" Yeah, like other companies didn't by XNine · · Score: 1

    sue this company before for infringing on their rights. In 2003 NINTENDO, that's right, NINTENDO sued Lik-Sang for selling devices enabling people to copy Game Boy Games. In 2002, Sony (the "evil" empire), Nintendo, and Microsoft all banded together to file suit against Lik-sang for selling mod-chips. So, please, before you go about spouting how Sony is the only one who's responsible for putting this company out of business, and how evil they are, and how you'll boycott them to the point that even your children won't be able to own anything with a Sony branded microchip/dial/button on it, please, type in "Lik-Sang sued" into your google search bar. Read about the company's past before you make stupid comments. over 14,000 links to stories.

    --
    Never monkey with another monkey's monkey.
  184. Sony's Response to the Lik Sang announcement by tntoak · · Score: 1

    From Sony's response to the Lik Sang Announcement:

    " We would also like to express our surprise at a company releasing personal information about its consumers, as this is contrary to data protection principles around the world."

    Maybe it's just me, but Sony has absolutely no room to talk about "principles" after the rootkit fiasco with their music CDs earlier this year. Sony wouldn't even let you download the patch to remove the rootkit without first giving them a bunch of personal information - information that is completely irrelevant the problem Sony created in the first place by adding a rootkit to their CDs.

    Perhaps Sony should spend less time worrying about an importer and start worrying about bigger issues - such as the recall of 8 million batteries and counting, continued delays of Blu-Ray players, PS3 production issues, and public sentiment that seems to be mounting against Sony and their entire product line...

  185. Re:Quit the BS Lik-Sang doesn't deserve any sympat by DrXym · · Score: 1
    I think the suing them for the PSP reason is bullshit too, but I expect they wanted to get the boot in before the PS3 was released. Then the reasons would have been pretty concrete.

    Japanese PS3s may not be certified (the CE mark) for Europe, don't run at the proper voltage (requiring an enormous step-down converter) and don't play European regional content (DVDs, games, BDs). They might have an English language setting and they might allow the timezone to be set but that's all you can hope for. Even the online functionality may be horked since you probably have to register (and read Japanese) with a Japanese address and credit card to get going. Even if you got through all that you'd have lots of Japanese buddies, horrific lag and a subpar experience.

    I guess Sony is worried for a many reasons - a) that Lik-Sang will bleed the market that these things are meant to be sold in (e.g. if 5000 consoles go to the EU that's 5% of their local launch market gone), b) that the devices will be dead money since people will buy the console and maybe a occasional of games but leave the online aspect alone c) Lik-Sang will slip the dead / fried / bricked PS3s back into the Japanese supply chain and burden Sony with the costs.

    The PSP really doesn't have many of these issues. I bought a PSP on a trip to Canada. I had no intention of paying rip-off prices for the movies, so it worked fine for me. The charger works on a range of voltages and is CE certified. Aside from UMD region protection on movies, there isn't much else that distinguishes one PSP from another. I even bought my USB / charger cable & memory stick from Lik-Sang. However I did drop the thing and break the UMD drive and discovered that my US/Canada warranty was worth precisely nothing in Europe. I had to repair the thing myself.

  186. Re:"Boycott SONY" Yeah, like other companies didn' by steveo777 · · Score: 1

    Umm.. except that those were all good reasons to get angry. This time Sony has a BS reason to sue. They stated that Lik-Sang shouldn't be allowed to import because the devices could be dangerous if used in a different country because of the power-supply. Well, seeing as they ship the same P/S with every unit around the world, that's pretty much BS. They site safety concerns, which this case has nothing to do with. In the other cases, it was a lot easier to prove that Lik-Sang was doing shady stuff, reselling PSPs and other consoles, wasn't in the same ballpark.

    --
    This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
  187. No double morality, just moral outrage by ^_^x · · Score: 1

    Sony didn't protect their trademark. They protected their regional lockouts while dragging their own trademark through the mud, as evidenced by all the angry comments on every site that reported this.

    You said you don't have consoles or play games, and it seems you missed some key points, so I'll explain a bit:

    Sony HATES importers, and always has, because they want people in Japan to buy from SCEJ, North America to buy from SCEA, and Europe from SCEE, (Sony Computer Entertainment Japan/America/Europe) so that each national branch knows how well a game did in a given region, and so each Sony branch can support itself on profits from its respective region without, say, taking a transfer from SCEJ to compensate for imports (which they can't track.) To this end, they cripple their hardware to pretend it can't read disks from a mismatched region in much the same way DVD players do. There ARE different TV standards in some countries, but to a knowledgable importer this is never a major issue (nor does it apply to PSPs.)

    Strangely enough, the PSP does not check region codes on games, yet they sued Lik-Sang on the false pretense that by offering the customers PSPs from another region, they were HARMING the customers, and the court bought it! The only way their argument could possibly be true is if the different electrical mains standards were different enough to fry the hardware - and guess what? The PSP I bought at launch came with an adapter that works on everything from 120V, 60Hz to 240V, 50Hz. I could fly to Europe today and plug my PSP in, and it would work the same as a European model - it just wouldn't play European UMD movies because a single byte in the firmware doesn't match up with the disc. The customers who imported them would tell you that rather than Lik-Sang harming them, Sony were being bastards toward Europe as usual by making them wait forever for a console that doesn't even use a different display standard this time!

    Lik-Sang, assuming you had a console, was a goldmine of hard to find and incredibly useful items such as the SmartJoy adapter (to play console FPSes with a keyboard and mouse), handheld-to-TV adapters, LCD-compatible lightguns, etc. These things could always be found at small HK gaming specialty shops, but Lik-Sang was the best organized, best stocked, and most reputable of them all (really without contest or viable competition.) For a typical order from them, you might have to investigate (with background checks to ensure you're not scammed) 50 HK game shops, and order from 5-10 just to get all the parts and games you wanted. Sony squashed this gaming resource basically in order to protect their antiquidated accounting practices, by successfully suing Lik-Sang for something that was NEVER ILLEGAL BEFORE THIS. This is a very bad precedent for console gamers, and so even if Lik-Sang wasn't loved by so many, it would still be quite chilling that Sony got away with such a flaky argument in court.

  188. Re:"Boycott SONY" Yeah, like other companies didn' by Stratus+Fear · · Score: 1

    The real reason, the one that isn't BS, is that Sony has the right to control distribution in the region. If they want to require distributors to be licensed with them, that's within their legal right. Lik-Sang obviously wasn't, and not only that, Lik-Sang was in the grey market -- importation of those foreign goods into that region without license. Selling Sony's stuff from another country there wasn't exactly legal. That's why they got sued. Of course, if you've seen the gamesindustry.biz article, Lik-Sang didn't even show up to court, paid no legal fees and hasn't paid the judgement -- they just closed up shop. It probably IS sour grapes as Sony said, as they did the same thing when Nintendo sued them a few years ago. They tucked tail and ran so they wouldn't be subject to punishment, and then came back later when nobody noticed.

  189. funy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  190. That's a sad story and everything, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "'d rather not shop at walmart, but I can't afford to spend 100 dollars more per month by going "the high road"."

    Walmart is actually a relatively expensive place to shop. It's a last resort for me, frankly. For anything that isn't bulky, Amazon is cheaper...by a lot. With free shipping and no tax.

    For food? Nope.

    This myth of Walmart and low prices is one that has me stumped, because if you do any kind of minimal comparison shopping, it's obvious that it's not cheapest or even cheaper than other stores. As I told my wife, Walmart must appeal to lower class people who don't have access to the internet.

  191. Sony: Screwing fairness and free markets all over by BobSutan · · Score: 1

    To those that think "grey market" is a bad, evil thing, take a good look at that PC you're typing on. If it wasn't for Compaq reverse-engineering the first IBM PC the computer industry as we know it would look extremely different, if exist at all. And those grey market mods for consoles are NO DIFFERENT than the add-ons we have for PCs today.

    Sony going out and suing companies that make parts for their hardware is no different that if Dell started suing Bios manufacturers.

    --
    "On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
  192. Principles? by Lunis+Neko · · Score: 1
    Sony responded, "The purchasing of PSP consoles by SCE employees would be for investigatory purposes. We would also like to express our surprise at a company releasing personal information about its consumers, as this is contrary to data protection principles around the world."
    Just like suing an import company for importing is contrary to good business principles around the world? Far be it from me to criticize, but it seems quite ironic to hear someone from Sony speak of principles, as if they knew what principles were.
  193. Re:Are you a walking billboard? (Very OT) by nuintari · · Score: 1

    Problem with sunglasses is that when you cut the lenses, and put them in the bath to stain them dark, they lose some of their corrective power, and the strength of the lens doesn't seem to degrade at any predictable rate. So most places that sell prescription shades are very reluctant to make glasses too strong, then put them in the stain bath. If they come out too strong, you'll be back in in a month complaining of severe headaches. You might have some luck if you ask, or see about getting the magnetic clip on shades. They are very slim, and near immpossible to tell that you aren't wearing shades once they are attached. Good Luck.

    --

    --Nuintari

    slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.