You have a lot of nerve saying that Larry Wall extends Perl without care or elegance. Are you the standard of elegance now? Just because it isn't the way you would do it, it must be wrong?
In case you haven't noticed, many large and complex systems are written in Perl. They use these features you find so worthless to write robust code that is easily shared among a large group of developers.
The beauty of Perl is that you can use it for your little throw-away scripts, and others can use it for powerful object-oriented server applications. That's flexibility, and practicality, and elegance. Keep up the good work, Larry!
Clearly you did it wrong then. If you write good perl code, and run it persistently as a part of the webserver using mod_perl, you will get great performance. If you write lousy perl and run it as a CGI, performance will suck.
Another thing to note is that Etoy fought *hard* to retain their rights, much harder than most people would. I have incredible respect for those guys.
What was it that won your respect? Was it when they put pictures of toys and links to fake stock information on their front page in order to confuse people who got there by accident? Was it their use of "the fucking flash plug-in"? Or was it when they put the word "Playboy" in their META tags? Truly a bunch of modern day Renoirs here.
no one got hurt - but the message is placed and the eToys share value sunk below its initial price of $20: value on tuesday / 11.12 AM: $19.0625 per share unit.
This is just silly. A shift of $1 in the price of an Internet stock is not even worth reporting. Suggetsing that there is somehow a causal relationship is just somebody's ego talking.
You actually think the ETYS stock price is affected by propaganda from the likes of RTMARK? Think again. Read the comments from stock analysts on ETYS. There is no relationship.
The difference is that Etoy.com had their domain for years, and were using it in a generally accepted 'appropriate' manner, and etoys fucked them over.
Some people actually went to the trouble of complaining about the "appropriate" manner in which etoy used their site. Anyway, they were putting things on their site (pictures of toys on the front page, fake stock info) to intentionally take advantage of the confusion with the eToys name, just like these domain speculators were hoping to take advantage of the Linux name.
Anyway, I think that in some cases the judges have a very hard time grasping the situation - the etoy case is a perfect example. If there is nothing as lame brained as this in the world, I don't know what can possibly be.
(I posted this in the domain dispute discussion, but maybe it makes more sense here.)
If you who think that etoy would win in court against eToys, you would do well to examine some of the prior cases of this kind. Take the ucla.com case, for example. In this case, someone registereducla.com and put up a bunch of links to porn sites. The University of California Los Angeles (ucla.edu) sued them and won, based on the fact that the ucla.com site was taking advantage of the name confusion.
Now, I know what you're thinking: etoy registered their domain name sooner, so this doesn't apply to them. The thing is, etoy did some things that certainly look like taking advantage of name confusion. For example, they put pictures of toys on their front page, and their selling of "shares" looks like it was prompted by the eToys IPO. That makes it much harder for them to claim there is no confusion or dillution of the eToys trademark, which is what the suit was about.
I think that who would win the court case is very unclear, but it's also unclear what would happen if etoy lost. The judge might simply tell them to stop putting pictures of toys on their site, put up a link to eToys, and go about their business. Taking the site off-line was simply a temporary measure until the case is heard.
The difference, of course, is that UCLA was in operation long before ucla.com was registered, while etoy.com was registered before eToys even existed (not just before they registered etoys.com). Unless someone in Switzerland has a time machine, the domain name can not possibly have been chosen to cause or exploit confusion with eToys
I think you missed my point. What I'm saying is that the etoy case is muddied by their bahavior with regard to name confusion with etoys.com. Their purpose or timing in registering the domain is irrelevant if they later intentionally took advantage of name confusion with a trademarked entity.
If you who think that etoy would win in court against eToys would do well to examine some of the prior cases of this kind. Take the ucla.com case, for example. In this case, someone registered ucla.com and put up a bunch of links to porn sites. The University of California Los Angeles (ucla.edu) sued them and won, based on the fact that the ucla.com site was taking advantage of the name confusion.
Now, I know what you're thinking: etoy registered their domain name sooner, so this doesn't apply to them. The thing is, etoy did some things that certainly look like taking advantage of name confusion. For example, they put pictures of toys on their front page, and their selling of "shares" looks like it was prompted by the eToys IPO. That makes it much harder for them to claim there is no confusion or dillution of the eToys trademark, which is what the suit was about.
I think that who would win the court case is very unclear, but it's also unclear what would happen if etoy lost. The judge might simply tell them to stop putting pictures of toys on their site, put up a link to eToys, and go about their business. Taking the site off-line was just a temporary measure until the case was heard.
Slashdot Mirror
You have a lot of nerve saying that Larry Wall extends Perl without care or elegance. Are you the standard of elegance now? Just because it isn't the way you would do it, it must be wrong?
In case you haven't noticed, many large and complex systems are written in Perl. They use these features you find so worthless to write robust code that is easily shared among a large group of developers.
The beauty of Perl is that you can use it for your little throw-away scripts, and others can use it for powerful object-oriented server applications. That's flexibility, and practicality, and elegance. Keep up the good work, Larry!
Clearly you did it wrong then. If you write good perl code, and run it persistently as a part of the webserver using mod_perl, you will get great performance. If you write lousy perl and run it as a CGI, performance will suck.
Oh, I see. It looked like they were saying they caused it to drop yesterday.
What was it that won your respect? Was it when they put pictures of toys and links to fake stock information on their front page in order to confuse people who got there by accident? Was it their use of "the fucking flash plug-in"? Or was it when they put the word "Playboy" in their META tags? Truly a bunch of modern day Renoirs here.
This is just silly. A shift of $1 in the price of an Internet stock is not even worth reporting. Suggetsing that there is somehow a causal relationship is just somebody's ego talking.
You actually think the ETYS stock price is affected by propaganda from the likes of RTMARK? Think again. Read the comments from stock analysts on ETYS. There is no relationship.
Some people actually went to the trouble of complaining about the "appropriate" manner in which etoy used their site. Anyway, they were putting things on their site (pictures of toys on the front page, fake stock info) to intentionally take advantage of the confusion with the eToys name, just like these domain speculators were hoping to take advantage of the Linux name.
(I posted this in the domain dispute discussion, but maybe it makes more sense here.)
If you who think that etoy would win in court against eToys, you would do well to examine some of the prior cases of this kind. Take the ucla.com case, for example. In this case, someone registereducla.com and put up a bunch of links to porn sites. The University of California Los Angeles (ucla.edu) sued them and won, based on the fact that the ucla.com site was taking advantage of the name confusion.
Now, I know what you're thinking: etoy registered their domain name sooner, so this doesn't apply to them. The thing is, etoy did some things that certainly look like taking advantage of name confusion. For example, they put pictures of toys on their front page, and their selling of "shares" looks like it was prompted by the eToys IPO. That makes it much harder for them to claim there is no confusion or dillution of the eToys trademark, which is what the suit was about.
I think that who would win the court case is very unclear, but it's also unclear what would happen if etoy lost. The judge might simply tell them to stop putting pictures of toys on their site, put up a link to eToys, and go about their business. Taking the site off-line was simply a temporary measure until the case is heard.
I think you missed my point. What I'm saying is that the etoy case is muddied by their bahavior with regard to name confusion with etoys.com. Their purpose or timing in registering the domain is irrelevant if they later intentionally took advantage of name confusion with a trademarked entity.
If you who think that etoy would win in court against eToys would do well to examine some of the prior cases of this kind. Take the ucla.com case, for example. In this case, someone registered ucla.com and put up a bunch of links to porn sites. The University of California Los Angeles (ucla.edu) sued them and won, based on the fact that the ucla.com site was taking advantage of the name confusion.
Now, I know what you're thinking: etoy registered their domain name sooner, so this doesn't apply to them. The thing is, etoy did some things that certainly look like taking advantage of name confusion. For example, they put pictures of toys on their front page, and their selling of "shares" looks like it was prompted by the eToys IPO. That makes it much harder for them to claim there is no confusion or dillution of the eToys trademark, which is what the suit was about.
I think that who would win the court case is very unclear, but it's also unclear what would happen if etoy lost. The judge might simply tell them to stop putting pictures of toys on their site, put up a link to eToys, and go about their business. Taking the site off-line was just a temporary measure until the case was heard.