But now they are patentable. We may not like the current system, but it is the current system and until we change it we have to live with it. As you said, Apple have licensed several different technologies in order to build their products. Their competitors could chose to do the same.
Because they're assholes. They've always been assholes since the '90s. They've just never had the financial clout to follow through until several years ago.
Or just that they feel that Android and especially Samsung has illegally copied iOS.
I can't go into a store and steal something just because I bought it before and lost it. I'm responsible for keeping track of my own stuff. And I don't try to push the copying vs. stealing debate, it's generally not acceptable to break the law because you forgot were you put your game.
Beside, you shouldn't pirate games anyway, you never know what malware you may get.
Okay, first off, downloading copyrighted material isn't stealing.
That doesn't make it OK.
Second, while a lot of piracy happens using bittorrent, a LOT of legal businesses use it also. For example, The Internet Archive is now online via Bit Torrent. http://bt1.archive.org/hotlist.php
Of course there's a lot of legal use. But is that really what most uTorrent users use it for?
File sharers tend to spend a lot of money on legal content as well actually. There are other reasons for pirating (eg, LAN play in SC II) and avoiding viruses, rootkits and malware packaged with legal copies of modern games.
So pirated material doesn't include viruses, rootkits or malware?
Considering that there is more that uses Bit torrent (WoW, Linux distributions, etc...) that is not infringing (Hint: It is a different crime on the books...it is not theft...) calling this that is a big fat line of BS.
And do you honestly think that WoW and Linux distributions is what most uTorrent users use that program for?
Except they don't distribute anything but their own client. It's the users that do all of the distribution.
That's like saying you find it odd that Google advertises through Chrome because Chrome can be used for illegal purposes.
In theory yes but lets face it, it is likely that most uTorrent users use the program for a slightly illegal purpose. It's a difference between "can be used for" and "is mostly used for", Chrome is the first and uTorrent the latter.
It should be up to the author(s) of the program. If they choose GPL they did so because they rather want the software to remain free, even if that meant that some distribution channels would be a no-no.
This is only a problem for those who choose GPL because it was popular, rather than choosing it because they truly wanted that. These people should have chosen a different license.
If the price is 99 cents then everyone who wants it should buy it. But if it's too easy to pirate it then some people will be tempted to pirate it anyway. That is a very sad thing.
Slashdot Mirror
But now they are patentable. We may not like the current system, but it is the current system and until we change it we have to live with it.
As you said, Apple have licensed several different technologies in order to build their products. Their competitors could chose to do the same.
Then they should have come up with something original on their own.
Apples wants to make great products that customers love.
That's what they are doing.
Anyone who have looked at their sales figures.
Last time I checked, they were doing pretty well.
Because they're assholes. They've always been assholes since the '90s. They've just never had the financial clout to follow through until several years ago.
Or just that they feel that Android and especially Samsung has illegally copied iOS.
I can't go into a store and steal something just because I bought it before and lost it. I'm responsible for keeping track of my own stuff. And I don't try to push the copying vs. stealing debate, it's generally not acceptable to break the law because you forgot were you put your game.
Beside, you shouldn't pirate games anyway, you never know what malware you may get.
What makes it "OK" is possibly someone's personal opinion.
Well, either that or the law.
That doesn't matter at all.
It does if the argument is about "Showing ads to thieves".
Which is why "Showing ads to thieves" still holds.
Okay, first off, downloading copyrighted material isn't stealing.
That doesn't make it OK.
Second, while a lot of piracy happens using bittorrent, a LOT of legal businesses use it also. For example, The Internet Archive is now online via Bit Torrent. http://bt1.archive.org/hotlist.php
Of course there's a lot of legal use. But is that really what most uTorrent users use it for?
File sharers tend to spend a lot of money on legal content as well actually. There are other reasons for pirating (eg, LAN play in SC II) and avoiding viruses, rootkits and malware packaged with legal copies of modern games.
So pirated material doesn't include viruses, rootkits or malware?
As to your misuse of the word "theft" to refer to sharing, see this handy guide: http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/2008/8/27/12/27311d2d7c84e8f3e3f5036ed08d198b.jpg
Sure but that doesn't make it OK.
Considering that there is more that uses Bit torrent (WoW, Linux distributions, etc...) that is not infringing (Hint: It is a different crime on the books...it is not theft...) calling this that is a big fat line of BS.
And do you honestly think that WoW and Linux distributions is what most uTorrent users use that program for?
Except they don't distribute anything but their own client. It's the users that do all of the distribution.
That's like saying you find it odd that Google advertises through Chrome because Chrome can be used for illegal purposes.
In theory yes but lets face it, it is likely that most uTorrent users use the program for a slightly illegal purpose.
It's a difference between "can be used for" and "is mostly used for", Chrome is the first and uTorrent the latter.
I don't see how this is a problem.
It should be up to the author(s) of the program. If they choose GPL they did so because they rather want the software to remain free, even if that meant that some distribution channels would be a no-no.
This is only a problem for those who choose GPL because it was popular, rather than choosing it because they truly wanted that.
These people should have chosen a different license.
So you're saying TSA don't do a good job?
Then tell me how many buildings terrorists have flown airplanes into recently. Name one!
You havent used an apple product recently, have you?...
Linux runs just fine on my Macs.
If it was so obvious, then why did all phones look different before and after iPhone?
You’re welcome to love Android and hate Apple. Just don’t be fooled into thinking Samsung are the good guys.
GNOME 3
It doesn't hurt anyone. If you don't want it, don't use it.
I for one seriously considers switching back to it.
Because it is profitable.
http://www.pixelmator.com/blog/2011/01/25/pixelmator-grosses-1-million-on-the-mac-app-store/
I thought I answered by describing what I meant.
So, to be clear. No, you're not correct.
Everyone using OpenOffice is fair competition.
But if everyone pirates Microsoft Office then that's unfair competition.
If the price is 99 cents then everyone who wants it should buy it.
But if it's too easy to pirate it then some people will be tempted to pirate it anyway.
That is a very sad thing.
Everyone that has a smartphone can afford paying 99 cents for an app.
If it's not easy to pirate it then people will buy it.
Apple's business model is fairly simple.
1. Customer gives you money
2. You give customer the product in return
3. Profit