The main problem being that LG did not file patents around the design of their Prada, or to be more precise, no patents that any reasonable court would have found the iPhone infringed on.
So let me get this straight: it's ok for Apple to be a dick to LG and steal their shit because LG didn't have the foresight to think that patenting something as stupid as a rounded-corner rectangle and an icon-grid-based UI should be patentable, but it's *not* ok for Samsung to be a dick to Apple and 'copy' their shit because Apple patented said shit?
And here we have a court of law saying that Apple can't block the sale of Samsung's products because Samsung didn't steal their ideas. Maybe Samsung and Apple and LG all got their inspiration from the same source. Guess you'll STFU now?
If you're going to appeal to authority (or lack of authority, in this case), you don't get to ignore when authority doesn't agree with you.
Do you have any idea how many Pac-Man and Space Invaders clones there were in the early 1980s? And few, if any, of the cloners were ever sued. This is because, as others have noted, you can't copyright game rules. You can trademark the title and copyright the code and graphics, but not stop someone else from independently re-implementing more or less the same game on their own.
The subtle and insidious difference between Zynga and the old clone companies, though, is that the old clone companies were the tiny struggling shops that ripped off successful ideas that had already gained mass-market appeal, while the likes of Namco and Taito kept inventing new things. Here, we have the 800 lb gorilla ripping off the work of the tiny struggling shops and using their brand power to sell them, while the actual inventors don't get jack.
It's a complete inversion of how things used to work. Knockoffs had a bad reputation for being knockoffs because they were generally inferior copies of something that people already knew about. Now, nobody even knows that what they're playing is a knockoff because Zynga's marketing machine drowns out the efforts of everyone else.
I don't know of an easy solution for it, other than to maybe put a bullet between the eyes of thieving sociopaths like Pincus, but it's a pretty fucked up situation where the actual creative talent gets absolutely no compensation and the knockoff artist dominates the market.
How about going back to the anti-trust regime we used to have? You know, where anti-competitive practices were against the law - and the law was actually enforced (sometimes by breaking up big companies into smaller ones).
That'll kill jobs and lead to socialism. Why do you hate the free market?
Now it looks like you're finally admitting what I've know all along. A little gas is one thing. Chopping down 20% of the rain forest...BIG EFFECT
Yeah, good for you. Have a nice little pat-yourself-on-the-back-for-being-so-smart? Now recognize that both in combination have a greater effect than either one alone, and you'll be right there with the rest of us.
Of course, like Obama and all other Democrats, you are incapable of criticizing them, no matter how wrong they are.
I don't know what you've been watching, but Obama takes a *ton* of heat from other democrats.
If Dodd were a Republican, the investigation would have been complete long ago, no petitions needed
Yeah, just like we had investigations of everyone involved in the Iraq war -- the democrats sure made sure the republicans involved paid for that! And the financial crisis -- look at all of the politically motivated trails happened there!
Oh wait, there weren't any. In fact, the only high-profile politically motivated investigations I can think of in my lifetime is the bullshit special investigation of Clinton by -- you guessed it -- republicans!
God, yeah, we democrats are just *so* bad at seeing our own blind spots. Thanks for pointing them out for us!
If you wanted to complain about something like house sales and being double-dipped in that process, sure. Or complain that sales tax on top of income tax is double dipping. Or really any other case where the income you take home is "split" again in the process of spending it.
But capital gains? You make X, you pay certain percentage of X in taxes and end up keeping Y. You invest Z amount of Y and end up making some other amount on top of Y that *has not been taxed*. Your original income, which you were taxed on, had nothing to do with this new capital gains income, other than that it allowed you to make the additional income later on. It ain't fucking double dipping no matter how you look at it.
and this is the first shot of an unrelenting 10-month assault.
Yeah, because Slashdot's coverage of the upcoming presidential circus is *really* going to affect the outcome of the general election./rolls eyes
Besides, it's been pretty clear for months that either Romney is going to get the nomination, or the Republican party might as well pack up their shit and go home, because *none* of those other evangelical crazies have any chance at beating Obama.
Because it's another high-UID first post from an account with no posting history written with a tone that sounds a hell of a lot like our friend bonch.
The shitty keyboard on that thing definitely looks MacBook-like. Additionally, the power button is in a similar position. Other than that, I wouldn't say that looks even remotely like my MacBook.
You got to admit it is pretty cool use of computer science....
No, we don't. I had the opportunity upon completion of my degree in computer science to go work for the NSA. I chose not to because I don't believe that's a "cool" use of my ability. Similarly, the work being done here is by people with dubious ethics.
I suppose that you'd think that malware is a "cool" use of computer science as well because of all the work and research that goes into producing it?
Except that Apple chose to ignore licensing the 3G F/RAND patents for the first several years of the existence of the iPhone, and is now complaining to the courts that they should just be able to pay the same fees that everyone else gets.
So, if this plays out in Apple's favor, the logical end result is that it's the wiser thing for everybody to NEVER license F/RAND patents; worst case for them is that years down the road they might get sued and have to pay the same thing they would have paid anyway, best case is that nobody notices/bothers to take them to court and they get away with it without paying anything.
Cars aren't IP, cars are a tool. They are a physical thing that you need to get the job done.
Games are sold on media. You aren't buying a piece of plastic in the shape of a disc, you are buying the bits on that disc. If it came on a cube or a tape or downloaded through the internet, the bits are really the only important thing in the transaction. If this observation doesn't describe you and you are, in fact, paying $60 for pieces of circular plastic, please get in touch with me as I have several hundred pieces that I'd be willing to sell you at a steep discount.
Now don't think that I'm defending this idiotic game studio (who will never make a sale to me); I've just seen this irksome analogy several times through the thread and it's bunk. People are constantly reminded that you can't "steal" IP the same way you can steal a car. Well, guess what: you don't get to compare sales of IP to sales of a car for the exact same reason. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
Ahh, wonderful, so if someone wants to sell their access to the DLC, they have to sell their access to every other piece of EA DLC along with it.
Or they have to carefully manage a boatload of different EA accounts to segregate all game-specific DLC to separate accounts.
Either way, it's not exactly customer-friendly.
And also either way, I don't buy DLC on principle so this issue doesn't affect me at all, but I can see how it would be a pain in the ass for someone who's already been willing to make that compromise.
Would your "My Maximum Acceptable Annual U.S. Terrorism Deaths" be less if one of those deaths were yours?
That would be an emotional decision, not a rational one. People who make decisions based on emotion are *not* the kind of people we want to be in charge.
Bush 2000 wasn't that bad; he was an unknown, and the press kept telling us how similar he and Gore were.
Bush 2004 was more stupid, but unfortunately Kerry was a really shitty candidate to run against him. Dean was the candidate to beat Bush, but after his gaffe that the "liberal" media beat to death to end his campaign, Kerry is what we got stuck with.
Slashdot Mirror
Marriage is a deal between two people and the rest of the community.
It's like you keep inventing ways to make yourself sound like even more of a tool.
--Jeremy
The main problem being that LG did not file patents around the design of their Prada, or to be more precise, no patents that any reasonable court would have found the iPhone infringed on.
So let me get this straight: it's ok for Apple to be a dick to LG and steal their shit because LG didn't have the foresight to think that patenting something as stupid as a rounded-corner rectangle and an icon-grid-based UI should be patentable, but it's *not* ok for Samsung to be a dick to Apple and 'copy' their shit because Apple patented said shit?
--Jeremy
And here we have a court of law saying that Apple can't block the sale of Samsung's products because Samsung didn't steal their ideas. Maybe Samsung and Apple and LG all got their inspiration from the same source. Guess you'll STFU now?
If you're going to appeal to authority (or lack of authority, in this case), you don't get to ignore when authority doesn't agree with you.
--Jeremy
iTunes works fine if you use it in the way that Apple thinks you should want to use it.
iTunes is a huge piece of shit if you try to use it in any other way.
--Jeremy
Do you have any idea how many Pac-Man and Space Invaders clones there were in the early 1980s? And few, if any, of the cloners were ever sued. This is because, as others have noted, you can't copyright game rules. You can trademark the title and copyright the code and graphics, but not stop someone else from independently re-implementing more or less the same game on their own.
The subtle and insidious difference between Zynga and the old clone companies, though, is that the old clone companies were the tiny struggling shops that ripped off successful ideas that had already gained mass-market appeal, while the likes of Namco and Taito kept inventing new things. Here, we have the 800 lb gorilla ripping off the work of the tiny struggling shops and using their brand power to sell them, while the actual inventors don't get jack.
It's a complete inversion of how things used to work. Knockoffs had a bad reputation for being knockoffs because they were generally inferior copies of something that people already knew about. Now, nobody even knows that what they're playing is a knockoff because Zynga's marketing machine drowns out the efforts of everyone else.
I don't know of an easy solution for it, other than to maybe put a bullet between the eyes of thieving sociopaths like Pincus, but it's a pretty fucked up situation where the actual creative talent gets absolutely no compensation and the knockoff artist dominates the market.
--Jeremy
How about going back to the anti-trust regime we used to have? You know, where anti-competitive practices were against the law - and the law was actually enforced (sometimes by breaking up big companies into smaller ones).
That'll kill jobs and lead to socialism. Why do you hate the free market?
--Jeremy
Yeah, censorship is only OK when Apple does it to keep undesirable things out of their App store. When Google does it? It's an affront to humanity.
--Jeremy
Now it looks like you're finally admitting what I've know all along. A little gas is one thing. Chopping down 20% of the rain forest...BIG EFFECT
Yeah, good for you. Have a nice little pat-yourself-on-the-back-for-being-so-smart? Now recognize that both in combination have a greater effect than either one alone, and you'll be right there with the rest of us.
--Jeremy
Of course, like Obama and all other Democrats, you are incapable of criticizing them, no matter how wrong they are.
I don't know what you've been watching, but Obama takes a *ton* of heat from other democrats.
If Dodd were a Republican, the investigation would have been complete long ago, no petitions needed
Yeah, just like we had investigations of everyone involved in the Iraq war -- the democrats sure made sure the republicans involved paid for that! And the financial crisis -- look at all of the politically motivated trails happened there!
Oh wait, there weren't any. In fact, the only high-profile politically motivated investigations I can think of in my lifetime is the bullshit special investigation of Clinton by -- you guessed it -- republicans!
God, yeah, we democrats are just *so* bad at seeing our own blind spots. Thanks for pointing them out for us!
--Jeremy
*cough* bullshit *cough*.
If you wanted to complain about something like house sales and being double-dipped in that process, sure. Or complain that sales tax on top of income tax is double dipping. Or really any other case where the income you take home is "split" again in the process of spending it.
But capital gains? You make X, you pay certain percentage of X in taxes and end up keeping Y. You invest Z amount of Y and end up making some other amount on top of Y that *has not been taxed*. Your original income, which you were taxed on, had nothing to do with this new capital gains income, other than that it allowed you to make the additional income later on. It ain't fucking double dipping no matter how you look at it.
--Jeremy
and this is the first shot of an unrelenting 10-month assault.
Yeah, because Slashdot's coverage of the upcoming presidential circus is *really* going to affect the outcome of the general election. /rolls eyes
Besides, it's been pretty clear for months that either Romney is going to get the nomination, or the Republican party might as well pack up their shit and go home, because *none* of those other evangelical crazies have any chance at beating Obama.
--Jeremy
Because it's another high-UID first post from an account with no posting history written with a tone that sounds a hell of a lot like our friend bonch.
--Jeremy
The shitty keyboard on that thing definitely looks MacBook-like. Additionally, the power button is in a similar position. Other than that, I wouldn't say that looks even remotely like my MacBook.
--Jeremy
You got to admit it is pretty cool use of computer science....
No, we don't. I had the opportunity upon completion of my degree in computer science to go work for the NSA. I chose not to because I don't believe that's a "cool" use of my ability. Similarly, the work being done here is by people with dubious ethics.
I suppose that you'd think that malware is a "cool" use of computer science as well because of all the work and research that goes into producing it?
--Jeremy
Except that Apple chose to ignore licensing the 3G F/RAND patents for the first several years of the existence of the iPhone, and is now complaining to the courts that they should just be able to pay the same fees that everyone else gets.
So, if this plays out in Apple's favor, the logical end result is that it's the wiser thing for everybody to NEVER license F/RAND patents; worst case for them is that years down the road they might get sued and have to pay the same thing they would have paid anyway, best case is that nobody notices/bothers to take them to court and they get away with it without paying anything.
--Jeremy
Cars aren't IP, cars are a tool. They are a physical thing that you need to get the job done.
Games are sold on media. You aren't buying a piece of plastic in the shape of a disc, you are buying the bits on that disc. If it came on a cube or a tape or downloaded through the internet, the bits are really the only important thing in the transaction. If this observation doesn't describe you and you are, in fact, paying $60 for pieces of circular plastic, please get in touch with me as I have several hundred pieces that I'd be willing to sell you at a steep discount.
Now don't think that I'm defending this idiotic game studio (who will never make a sale to me); I've just seen this irksome analogy several times through the thread and it's bunk. People are constantly reminded that you can't "steal" IP the same way you can steal a car. Well, guess what: you don't get to compare sales of IP to sales of a car for the exact same reason. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
--Jeremy
Ahh, wonderful, so if someone wants to sell their access to the DLC, they have to sell their access to every other piece of EA DLC along with it.
Or they have to carefully manage a boatload of different EA accounts to segregate all game-specific DLC to separate accounts.
Either way, it's not exactly customer-friendly.
And also either way, I don't buy DLC on principle so this issue doesn't affect me at all, but I can see how it would be a pain in the ass for someone who's already been willing to make that compromise.
--Jeremy
Would your "My Maximum Acceptable Annual U.S. Terrorism Deaths" be less if one of those deaths were yours?
That would be an emotional decision, not a rational one. People who make decisions based on emotion are *not* the kind of people we want to be in charge.
--Jeremy
Lemme ask -- how closely did you investigate your guy's academic transcript? Oh, you didn't even glance at it? Go figure.
--Jeremy
It really seems to me that people that are the most gung-ho about the war on terror are utter cowards. Parent post is a perfect example.
--Jeremy
And there will likely be real-world technical reasons to kill live on XBox 360 games.
--Jeremy
Zynga has the R&D muscle to polish up the graphics and get them out the door in a fairly expeditious fashion.
R&D? Retread & dupe?
--Jeremy
The Federal Government is bringing in the same money it did in 1998 and 1999 - even adjusting for inflation
Considering the number of tax breaks we've had over the past 10 years, this quote just set off my ignorance and/or lie detector.
Yep. Ignorance. See those sharp downward spikes there first in 2001ish and then again around 2008?
--Jeremy
Bush 2000 wasn't that bad; he was an unknown, and the press kept telling us how similar he and Gore were.
Bush 2004 was more stupid, but unfortunately Kerry was a really shitty candidate to run against him. Dean was the candidate to beat Bush, but after his gaffe that the "liberal" media beat to death to end his campaign, Kerry is what we got stuck with.
--Jeremy
Yes, we would have been better off voting for the career senator who couldn't even remember how many houses he owned.
--Jeremy