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.
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...
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.
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.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
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."
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."
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
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.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
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!
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.
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.
Does that also mean no Apple, Dell, HP, or Toshiba Laptops which use sony manufactured batteries?
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'
Sorry, I had to say it. That is all.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
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.
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
"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...
In most cases, the old adage "you get what you pay for" holds true.
...I resent advertising for them.
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).
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
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.
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.
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!
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".