This is literally an agreement in restraint of trade. It's a criminal violation of antitrust laws. You can't enter into an agreement that stipulates excluding a competitor as a term.
So, who amongst geeks or hardware hackers needs Amazon or official Apple Macbooks? Refurbished Macbooks are aplenty on ebay, as always. Similarly, macos Mojave works on cheap linux-using laptops in vmware with some tweaking.
Um, putting macOS on a USED Apple computer is one thing; putting macOS on non-Apple Hardware is QUITE another.
Isn't this partially illegal in some states - amazon should be treated as some form of common carrier and maybe regulated if it's starting to pull sh*t like this?
Hell, my employer loses 10s of thousands of dollars a month in fraud from people reselling our stuff on Amazon and Amazon refuses to do anything about it, even after we've told them repeatedly that our products are not authorized for sale on their site.
I'm pretty sure the Doctrine of First Sale prevents your employer from prevailing in a lawsuit to stop that; so long as they don't misrepresent themselves as an Authorized Reseller or somesuch.
You may be "pretty sure," but if they have monopoly power, then no, they don't. Or, they shouldn't: that is what antitrust laws are about, and a monopoly making a deal to only sell one vendor's (more expensive) product is exactly why we have antitrust laws. Read some history.
More to the point, not once have I bought anything on eBay merely because it was cheaper there. I don't even *start* looking at eBay unless Amazon has failed to provide the product.
So, what you are saying is, that you have SELF-SELECTED Amazon, and then have the temerity to call it a "Monopoly"?
Right. Gotcha.
Frankly, I have bought several used Apple products over the years, and not ONE of them have I ever even LOOKED at Amazon. They have all come from eBay. In fact, in my mind:
1. Amazon = First place to check for New stuff. 2. eBay = First place to check for Used stuff.
And I would bet that 95% of all people feel exactly the same. In fact, I really didn't pay attention to the fact that there were whole businesses who sold Used stuff through Amazon.
I think the only Used thing I ever bought through Amazon was an out-of-print Sci-Fi book I wanted to re-read. And, IIRC, that wasn't even a wonderful experience; they sent me the wrong book the first time...
Blunt maybe, but hardly offtopic. Say, you have issues with intellectual honesty. But why should anybody be surprised that an Apple swallower is intellectually dishonest.
You coulda parted with a couple of bucks to keep this excellent project going. I have a ton of friends who have put music on that site and I've contributed some too.
You expect everything for free and this is why we can't have nice things.
Here for example, check out these nice young men from the Northwest who play deep deep funk and have given music to the site for free.
A Clue for you, who invented SystemD, what company does the man work for and who bought the company the man works for? there you go, the dots will connect
Are you talking about the Company that invented launchd, the Progenitor of SystemD?
don't know, Apple makes a fair point.. they bought from someone else, the licensing agreement between Qualcomm and that someone else is entirely between them.
Qualcomm doesn't get to attach a rider that says "and you have to pay us too". Whomever is selling to Apple is already paying Qualcomm, and Qualcomm isn't a party to this sale.
To me this sounds more like buying a hamburger at McDonald's and the beef supplier demanding that you have to pay them too.
You are exactly right!
In fact, doesn't the doctrine of first-sale apply? Or is that only for a sale to an end-consumer?
But you are correct; Apple is not a party nor in privity of an Agreement between Qualcomm and the module-manufacturer that Apple DID buy from.
Hay guys did you know that Samsung is about to release a foldable tablet? This isn't like all those other times they said they were about to release a foldable tablet because _______________
Shouldnt the update policy mean how long the device is supported at minimum? So there shouldnt be anything wrong or unexpected with a longer support time frame.
At the same time five year old Apple devices (5S) still receive support and the latest versions. T
Yes, but they also don't send updates to hobble our phones until we fork out £1000 for a new one, so I consider myself better off with Android.
You mean they also don't send out updates that make it so my old phone doesn't suddenly crash because you're in the cold trying to call for emergency services after your car ends up in a snow bank in the middle of nowhere in 5 deg. Weather? That update? The one you can also DISABLE if you so choose?
Slashdot Mirror
This is literally an agreement in restraint of trade.
It's a criminal violation of antitrust laws.
You can't enter into an agreement that stipulates excluding a competitor as a term.
Prove it.
We'll wait...
Apple is telling Amazon to tell you what you can and cannot do.
You're retarded. Did your Mother have you tested?
How is this even legal under Right of First Sale?
It is ultimately Amazon that has the "right" to pick and choose what they accept for sale. Apple has zero REAL control over that.
And it is Apple's "right" to set any terms and conditions they wish with a prospective Authorized Reseller. Amazon doesn't HAVE to sell Apple's stuff.
Dumbass.
eBay isn't interested, they'll let other people with Apple product list and be perfectly happy to take their taste of the final sale price.
...and, considering how extraordinarily well Apple products retain their value, is probably perfectly fine with eBay, and their Sellers.
So, who amongst geeks or hardware hackers needs Amazon or official Apple Macbooks? Refurbished Macbooks are aplenty on ebay, as always. Similarly, macos Mojave works on cheap linux-using laptops in vmware with some tweaking.
Um, putting macOS on a USED Apple computer is one thing; putting macOS on non-Apple Hardware is QUITE another.
Isn't this partially illegal in some states - amazon should be treated as some form of common carrier and maybe regulated if it's starting to pull sh*t like this?
Common Carrier?!?
LOLOLOLOL!
Boy, you Slashtards are D-U-M-B!!!
Seems like (ought-to-be-unlawful) collusion to put paid to competition to me.
That's because you're an idiot, like most ACs.
Hell, my employer loses 10s of thousands of dollars a month in fraud from people reselling our stuff on Amazon and Amazon refuses to do anything about it, even after we've told them repeatedly that our products are not authorized for sale on their site.
I'm pretty sure the Doctrine of First Sale prevents your employer from prevailing in a lawsuit to stop that; so long as they don't misrepresent themselves as an Authorized Reseller or somesuch.
You may be "pretty sure," but if they have monopoly power, then no, they don't. Or, they shouldn't: that is what antitrust laws are about, and a monopoly making a deal to only sell one vendor's (more expensive) product is exactly why we have antitrust laws. Read some history.
Are you REALLY that stupid?
What are you advocating for here, compulsory product listings from randoms who switch out fans and disks?
This. Exactly This.
Sounds like something the EU would impose.
More to the point, not once have I bought anything on eBay merely because it was cheaper there. I don't even *start* looking at eBay unless Amazon has failed to provide the product.
So, what you are saying is, that you have SELF-SELECTED Amazon, and then have the temerity to call it a "Monopoly"?
Right. Gotcha.
Frankly, I have bought several used Apple products over the years, and not ONE of them have I ever even LOOKED at Amazon. They have all come from eBay. In fact, in my mind:
1. Amazon = First place to check for New stuff.
2. eBay = First place to check for Used stuff.
And I would bet that 95% of all people feel exactly the same. In fact, I really didn't pay attention to the fact that there were whole businesses who sold Used stuff through Amazon.
I think the only Used thing I ever bought through Amazon was an out-of-print Sci-Fi book I wanted to re-read. And, IIRC, that wasn't even a wonderful experience; they sent me the wrong book the first time...
Blunt maybe, but hardly offtopic. Say, you have issues with intellectual honesty. But why should anybody be surprised that an Apple swallower is intellectually dishonest.
*I* have issues with intellectual honesty?!?
That's really rich, coming from YOU.
You coulda parted with a couple of bucks to keep this excellent project going. I have a ton of friends who have put music on that site and I've contributed some too.
You expect everything for free and this is why we can't have nice things.
Here for example, check out these nice young men from the Northwest who play deep deep funk and have given music to the site for free.
http://freemusicarchive.org/mu...
Nice!
Sounds like the Rhythm-bed for an early Zappa tune...
Love the Trombone solo!
Guitar solo is way too hot in the mix, though.
That is a real bummer. Where will I get my minimalist dubstep alt-electronica music now?
GET it?!? You could probably write a 10 line BASIC program to GENERATE it!!!
(j/k) (I like it, too!)
A Clue for you, who invented SystemD, what company does the man work for and who bought the company the man works for? there you go, the dots will connect
Are you talking about the Company that invented launchd, the Progenitor of SystemD?
Deadbeat Apple won't pay its bills.
Talk about both Offtopic and Caustic...
don't know, Apple makes a fair point .. they bought from someone else, the licensing agreement between Qualcomm and that someone else is entirely between them.
Qualcomm doesn't get to attach a rider that says "and you have to pay us too". Whomever is selling to Apple is already paying Qualcomm, and Qualcomm isn't a party to this sale.
To me this sounds more like buying a hamburger at McDonald's and the beef supplier demanding that you have to pay them too.
You are exactly right!
In fact, doesn't the doctrine of first-sale apply? Or is that only for a sale to an end-consumer?
But you are correct; Apple is not a party nor in privity of an Agreement between Qualcomm and the module-manufacturer that Apple DID buy from.
I wouldn't settle either.
Hay guys did you know that Samsung is about to release a foldable tablet? This isn't like all those other times they said they were about to release a foldable tablet because _______________
You noticed that too?
Now only if Android on a tablet wasn't an infuriating shit show mish-mash of applications that don't rotate or scale properly to the larger screen.
Wow!
And Slashtards whine about iOS...
This was pretty cool the first ten times companies did it.
Kinda how I felt about it.
We're doing five notches!
There! Are! FOUR! Notches!!!
Samsung will begin reselling Apple iPhones, rebranded as Samsung phones.
Begin?
You misspelled "Continue".
Samsung.....I thought you were cool.....The notch is so so stupid. For crying out loud you made a commercial making fun of the notch.
Oh yeah; there IS that...
Next: There goes the Headphone Jack!
Mwuhahahahahahaaaaa!
Shouldnt the update policy mean how long the device is supported at minimum? So there shouldnt be anything wrong or unexpected with a longer support time frame.
At the same time five year old Apple devices (5S) still receive support and the latest versions. T
Yes, but they also don't send updates to hobble our phones until we fork out £1000 for a new one, so I consider myself better off with Android.
You mean they also don't send out updates that make it so my old phone doesn't suddenly crash because you're in the cold trying to call for emergency services after your car ends up in a snow bank in the middle of nowhere in 5 deg. Weather? That update? The one you can also DISABLE if you so choose?
Yeah, Apple sure is evil...