But that is still a breach of contract(1): the machine was sold as a machine that can run Linux *and* use the service. Now all of sudden it's either one or the other. According to several jurisdiction (France is cited in the example) Sony owes their customer some money.
Close, but not quite correct. In the UK (and the EU), an item must be sold as "fit for purpose" and it is the retailer that is obliged to ensure that is the case not the manufacturer. In terms of electronic devices, fit for purpose usually means that it must perform the functions that it was advertised as performing at the time of purchase for a minimum of 6 years. Clearly this action by Sony breaks this sales contract, but the refund must come from the retailer as it was they that the consumer entered into contract with.
However, the retailer would then claim the compensation back from the manufacturer as they are also entitled to the same "fit for purpose" guarantee. Therefore it will Amazon (in this case) that come knocking on Sony's door for a refund, not Joe Public. Sony may have a harder time brushing them off.
Calm down. They didn't do this on purpose, it was a bug, an accident. Accidents happen. No-one is to blame.
It sounds like you need to get out of the basement, go take a walk, and interact with the regular 3D world for a change and come back to your PS3 in a few days when Sony have fixed it. I'm no corporate apologist, but if you can't survive without your PS3 for a few days then its you who has a problem and not Sony.
Having worked at a company that ditched Directory Server in favour of Open LDAP I can tell you that the migration from one to the other is a piece of cake. Just export the Directory Server schema in LDIF format, import into Open LDAP, transfer the data, and job done. Nothing to worry about at all, other than saving a few $$$ on license fees.
I'm not at all knowledgable about UK law but in the USA verbal agreements or promises are non-binding
Here in the UK verbal contracts are legally binding as long as it can be proved what was said (i.e. witness testimony). Written contracts can also be implicitly agreed to without signing them, e.g. if I received a contract of employment that had a clause in that I disputed, but turned up for work before the dispute was solved and the contract signed, then I will have implicitly agreed to the original version of the contract that included the disputed clause.
It's not like all major operating systems are developed in the US (Windows, Mac, Linux -- US corporations are the primary workers on the kernel, Red Hat, Novell, Oracle, Linus lives in the US). Adobe is based in the US
And every single one of the companies you list is deep in litigation at this very moment and spending millions (perhaps billions) fighting lawsuits. You think that situation can carry on forever?
Those companies are lucky in that they have a decent warchest in order to keep trading. I suspect it is now next to impossible to start up and run a brand new technology company in the US. The best you can hope for is to be bought out by the big boys, or they're going to sue you into oblivion because there is pretty much nothing that you can do that won't be covered by some patent or other.
Software patents aren't just bad ideologically, they are going to bring the US IT industry to its knees. Perhaps not now, but give it 10 years...
he United States market is large enough that "it doesn't just work in the United States" means "it doesn't just work" because the install disc would require onboard GPS so that it won't install on a machine on U.S. soil.
To use a British word - bollocks. Americans would like to think so, and indeed it used to be the case, but it is not the case anymore. If it works in Japan, Europe, China, South Africa and Australasia then the vast majority of the world would perceive it as "just working". Contrary to the belief of Americans, no one elsewhere gives a shit about the problems you have with patents and the litigation that goes along with them. We'll carry on using H.264 and the like just fine and if Americans can't then we don't honestly care anymore.
And yet even with a perfectly legitimate, reasonable, intelligent argument against H.264, tons of/. comments will go against FF's decision to promote an open, free (for everyone, not just the end users) and sane video standard over a proprietary one, ensuring that only people with lots of money can create browsers, run video sites, etc.
It's time Americans stopped thinking of themselves as the centre of world technology. If Mozilla is determined to follow US law only and therefore not implement H.264 because it's encumbered with license fees there due to dumb local laws, then it is going to go the same way as the whole US software industry - it will disappear into a black hole of law suits and legal action and very quickly become irrelevant.
H.264 is a free and open standard, just not in the US. And to be honest, you can cry me a river. The US got itself into this mess, the US needs to get itself out of it, because quite honestly, the rest of the world is not going to wait around in the meantime.
My prediction? Canonical will fork it as Mark Shuttleworth's vision of Ubuntu is that "it just works". If the only way for him to achieve that is to fork Mozilla, then that is what I'm sure he'll at least consider doing.
Because Mozilla Corporation is headquartered in the United States
Tough luck for them. I't won't be long for a fork to appear that includes the H.264 codec - possibly released by Canonical or other interested party . The US seems to be rapidly heading towards some kind of lawsuit singularity which it needs to pull back from or simply disappear.
several European countries appear to recognize patents on H.264 and AAC as well.
Citation? I can't find anything concrete to support this statement.
The patent means that it can't legally be used in software licensed under the GPL/LGPL 3.0 in countries like the US.
And the rest of the world cares because? It's time the rest of the world stuck two fingers up at the US system, grew a backbone, and left the US to their own downward legal spiral. All we need is a non-US company (Canonical perhaps?) to fork Firefox and end this madness.
Citation? Whilst many of the patent holders are European companies, I'm pretty sure that licenses are only payable in the US. Wasn't it the case that Fraunhofer only required license fees in the US for MP3? They sold their own implementation of the MP3 codec elsewhere yes, but independent implementations were license free as I recall.
And a majority of that third live outside the jurisdiction of the US patent system so the license issue becomes moot. Personally I'd rather the rest of the world stick 2 fingers up at the US system and continue to use browsers that support H.264 and don't pay any patent licenses to anyone.
For example, why not make a US and non-US version of Firefox with the non-US version having H.264 support. US people will still manage to get the working version and Firefox will still have the required support.
And neither to the majority of Internet users around the world as there is no license required outside of America (and possibly Japan). OSS supporters need to focus on the fact that it is the US patent system that is broken here, not the codec.
Prince Harry in the UK has just got his military pilots license and after generations of in-breeding it's pretty well known he's not the sharpest tool in the box.
As for military computer work, need I point you towards the US military network that Gary McKinnon supposedly "hacked" by entering blank passwords? Great work there by such bright guys.
If you're in the EU you're almost certainly entitled to a refund regardless of what Steam's policy says.
Businesses try it on all the time. Just today I overheard a shop assistant telling a customer that they needed a receipt in order to claim a refund, which is just not true, at least here in the UK.
And Steam support doesn't give refunds except for pre-purchases.
That would be illegal here in the UK. Seems to me that the problem here is US consumer legislation, which I guess is what you were moaning about in your first post. I didn't realise it was that bad though that you can't get a refund for something that doesn't work at all.
He wouldn't cave on principle and the legal costs bankrupted him and he lost his business.
That's a failure of the the way the US legal system works as well as the behaviour of ASCAP. In fact, if the US legal system had a loser pays system like most of the free world, it is unlikely that ASCAP would sue in the first place.
Damn right I would want the law involved, this is a defective title but I can't do anything about it except trying it on some future computer and hoping that ME finds it satisfactory for whatever reason.
Why not just take it back to the shop and get your money back?
Well, here in the EU at least you would be entitled to refunds for both your LCD monitor and cellphone regardless of warranty as all goods are required to be sold as "fit for purpose". Clearly neither of these products functioned to reasonable expectations and you would just return them to the store you bought them from.
On top of that, my statutory rights also allow me to return any product (working or not) within 7 days if they are bought "sight unseen", i.e. over the Internet.
They do. When I was a student (in the UK), I got given a fine where the supposed minimum was £1000. However, I made a representation to the court that as a student I could never afford that and supplied details of my income, and they calculated exactly what I needed in order to just about survive and reduced the fine to leave me that minimum amount for about 3 months. OK, I couldn't afford beer, but I could live. In the circumstances I thought that was pretty fair and reasonable given that a fine is supposed to punish you, not leave you bankrupt.
Irrelevant. I was a musician new to DAW recording and knew nothing of the history. Nor did I care. All I cared about was getting the best DAW package at the best price (£170 for Logic Studio 8 in my case). Since it only runs on a Mac, I bought a Mac too. Given that Logic Studio also includes Mainstage, Waveburner, Soundtrack Pro and whole slew of other utilities, even with the premium price of a Mac this meant great value for money.
To be honest I've never understood the mentality of criticising large companies for their actions. ALL large companies would do exactly what Microsoft and Apple do if they felt they could get away with it. Corporations aren't evil, they just are - and that is just the way things are in a capitalist system.
And as for the fanbois of whatever, that's just illogical. Best tool for the job and all that.
Slashdot Mirror
But that is still a breach of contract(1): the machine was sold as a machine that can run Linux *and* use the service. Now all of sudden it's either one or the other. According to several jurisdiction (France is cited in the example) Sony owes their customer some money.
Close, but not quite correct. In the UK (and the EU), an item must be sold as "fit for purpose" and it is the retailer that is obliged to ensure that is the case not the manufacturer. In terms of electronic devices, fit for purpose usually means that it must perform the functions that it was advertised as performing at the time of purchase for a minimum of 6 years. Clearly this action by Sony breaks this sales contract, but the refund must come from the retailer as it was they that the consumer entered into contract with.
However, the retailer would then claim the compensation back from the manufacturer as they are also entitled to the same "fit for purpose" guarantee. Therefore it will Amazon (in this case) that come knocking on Sony's door for a refund, not Joe Public. Sony may have a harder time brushing them off.
In the UK you get better phones free with a pay as you go plan. If your offering is worse than free, then you've lost, badly.
Calm down. They didn't do this on purpose, it was a bug, an accident. Accidents happen. No-one is to blame.
It sounds like you need to get out of the basement, go take a walk, and interact with the regular 3D world for a change and come back to your PS3 in a few days when Sony have fixed it. I'm no corporate apologist, but if you can't survive without your PS3 for a few days then its you who has a problem and not Sony.
Having worked at a company that ditched Directory Server in favour of Open LDAP I can tell you that the migration from one to the other is a piece of cake. Just export the Directory Server schema in LDIF format, import into Open LDAP, transfer the data, and job done. Nothing to worry about at all, other than saving a few $$$ on license fees.
I could go on.
There are many things wrong in China, true. But on the other hand, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
I'm not at all knowledgable about UK law but in the USA verbal agreements or promises are non-binding
Here in the UK verbal contracts are legally binding as long as it can be proved what was said (i.e. witness testimony). Written contracts can also be implicitly agreed to without signing them, e.g. if I received a contract of employment that had a clause in that I disputed, but turned up for work before the dispute was solved and the contract signed, then I will have implicitly agreed to the original version of the contract that included the disputed clause.
It's not like all major operating systems are developed in the US (Windows, Mac, Linux -- US corporations are the primary workers on the kernel, Red Hat, Novell, Oracle, Linus lives in the US). Adobe is based in the US
And every single one of the companies you list is deep in litigation at this very moment and spending millions (perhaps billions) fighting lawsuits. You think that situation can carry on forever?
Those companies are lucky in that they have a decent warchest in order to keep trading. I suspect it is now next to impossible to start up and run a brand new technology company in the US. The best you can hope for is to be bought out by the big boys, or they're going to sue you into oblivion because there is pretty much nothing that you can do that won't be covered by some patent or other.
Software patents aren't just bad ideologically, they are going to bring the US IT industry to its knees. Perhaps not now, but give it 10 years...
he United States market is large enough that "it doesn't just work in the United States" means "it doesn't just work" because the install disc would require onboard GPS so that it won't install on a machine on U.S. soil.
To use a British word - bollocks. Americans would like to think so, and indeed it used to be the case, but it is not the case anymore. If it works in Japan, Europe, China, South Africa and Australasia then the vast majority of the world would perceive it as "just working". Contrary to the belief of Americans, no one elsewhere gives a shit about the problems you have with patents and the litigation that goes along with them. We'll carry on using H.264 and the like just fine and if Americans can't then we don't honestly care anymore.
It is so utterly archaic and unfair that this is allowed to continue; MPEG-LA have the US industry by its consumers by their collective balls
FTFY
And yet even with a perfectly legitimate, reasonable, intelligent argument against H.264, tons of /. comments will go against FF's decision to promote an open, free (for everyone, not just the end users) and sane video standard over a proprietary one, ensuring that only people with lots of money can create browsers, run video sites, etc.
It's time Americans stopped thinking of themselves as the centre of world technology. If Mozilla is determined to follow US law only and therefore not implement H.264 because it's encumbered with license fees there due to dumb local laws, then it is going to go the same way as the whole US software industry - it will disappear into a black hole of law suits and legal action and very quickly become irrelevant.
H.264 is a free and open standard, just not in the US. And to be honest, you can cry me a river. The US got itself into this mess, the US needs to get itself out of it, because quite honestly, the rest of the world is not going to wait around in the meantime.
My prediction? Canonical will fork it as Mark Shuttleworth's vision of Ubuntu is that "it just works". If the only way for him to achieve that is to fork Mozilla, then that is what I'm sure he'll at least consider doing.
Because Mozilla Corporation is headquartered in the United States
Tough luck for them. I't won't be long for a fork to appear that includes the H.264 codec - possibly released by Canonical or other interested party . The US seems to be rapidly heading towards some kind of lawsuit singularity which it needs to pull back from or simply disappear.
several European countries appear to recognize patents on H.264 and AAC as well.
Citation? I can't find anything concrete to support this statement.
The patent means that it can't legally be used in software licensed under the GPL/LGPL 3.0 in countries like the US.
And the rest of the world cares because? It's time the rest of the world stuck two fingers up at the US system, grew a backbone, and left the US to their own downward legal spiral. All we need is a non-US company (Canonical perhaps?) to fork Firefox and end this madness.
Citation? Whilst many of the patent holders are European companies, I'm pretty sure that licenses are only payable in the US. Wasn't it the case that Fraunhofer only required license fees in the US for MP3? They sold their own implementation of the MP3 codec elsewhere yes, but independent implementations were license free as I recall.
And a majority of that third live outside the jurisdiction of the US patent system so the license issue becomes moot. Personally I'd rather the rest of the world stick 2 fingers up at the US system and continue to use browsers that support H.264 and don't pay any patent licenses to anyone.
For example, why not make a US and non-US version of Firefox with the non-US version having H.264 support. US people will still manage to get the working version and Firefox will still have the required support.
And neither to the majority of Internet users around the world as there is no license required outside of America (and possibly Japan). OSS supporters need to focus on the fact that it is the US patent system that is broken here, not the codec.
What a pretentious little prick. I've got more talent in my little finger than that jumped up karaoke singer has in his whole body.
Well....
Prince Harry in the UK has just got his military pilots license and after generations of in-breeding it's pretty well known he's not the sharpest tool in the box.
As for military computer work, need I point you towards the US military network that Gary McKinnon supposedly "hacked" by entering blank passwords? Great work there by such bright guys.
If you're in the EU you're almost certainly entitled to a refund regardless of what Steam's policy says.
Businesses try it on all the time. Just today I overheard a shop assistant telling a customer that they needed a receipt in order to claim a refund, which is just not true, at least here in the UK.
And Steam support doesn't give refunds except for pre-purchases.
That would be illegal here in the UK. Seems to me that the problem here is US consumer legislation, which I guess is what you were moaning about in your first post. I didn't realise it was that bad though that you can't get a refund for something that doesn't work at all.
He wouldn't cave on principle and the legal costs bankrupted him and he lost his business.
That's a failure of the the way the US legal system works as well as the behaviour of ASCAP. In fact, if the US legal system had a loser pays system like most of the free world, it is unlikely that ASCAP would sue in the first place.
Shouldn't stop you getting your money back. You could have got your bank to issue a chargeback for example.
Damn right I would want the law involved, this is a defective title but I can't do anything about it except trying it on some future computer and hoping that ME finds it satisfactory for whatever reason.
Why not just take it back to the shop and get your money back?
Well, here in the EU at least you would be entitled to refunds for both your LCD monitor and cellphone regardless of warranty as all goods are required to be sold as "fit for purpose". Clearly neither of these products functioned to reasonable expectations and you would just return them to the store you bought them from.
On top of that, my statutory rights also allow me to return any product (working or not) within 7 days if they are bought "sight unseen", i.e. over the Internet.
They do. When I was a student (in the UK), I got given a fine where the supposed minimum was £1000. However, I made a representation to the court that as a student I could never afford that and supplied details of my income, and they calculated exactly what I needed in order to just about survive and reduced the fine to leave me that minimum amount for about 3 months. OK, I couldn't afford beer, but I could live. In the circumstances I thought that was pretty fair and reasonable given that a fine is supposed to punish you, not leave you bankrupt.
Irrelevant. I was a musician new to DAW recording and knew nothing of the history. Nor did I care. All I cared about was getting the best DAW package at the best price (£170 for Logic Studio 8 in my case). Since it only runs on a Mac, I bought a Mac too. Given that Logic Studio also includes Mainstage, Waveburner, Soundtrack Pro and whole slew of other utilities, even with the premium price of a Mac this meant great value for money.
To be honest I've never understood the mentality of criticising large companies for their actions. ALL large companies would do exactly what Microsoft and Apple do if they felt they could get away with it. Corporations aren't evil, they just are - and that is just the way things are in a capitalist system.
And as for the fanbois of whatever, that's just illogical. Best tool for the job and all that.