Sell the damn things without drives and have people buy the drives as DRIVES - separately. How asinine this is - especially for a Euro country!
See, you'd think that with how the slashbots love to bash America and embrace anything that's "Not America," but find me a supposedly enlightened Euro nation that DOESN'T tax blank media. I know France, Britain, Germany, Italy, and Belgium all do, all the Scandinavian countries do, and it looks the Netherlands is about there. Not sure about Spain. Canada does as well, and I think might have been the first.
Not starting a flame war, just pointing out that it's easy to focus on the crappy things that happen anywhere...but I don't see a "media tax" happening in the US. People say the US is controlled by corporations - true to a large extent, but or RIAA isn't as influential, evidently, as their Euro counterparts. We prefer evidence of crime before punishment...at least for our citizens.;P
Yes, you absolutely can if it pertains to a market where the term is arbitrary or fanciful. Apple can TM Tiger for operating systems, but not for pet stores. If they could, every pet store that sold/advertised "Tigers" would be an infringer. Courts will not allow you to effectively remove a term from the English language that a competitor must use to describe their goods. That is why trademarks are market specific.
That's kinda what I meant. But the tradeoff is that typically for trademark law, the more generic the name the narrower the focus you're granted. As such, you can't do anything with Microsoft, but you can't get broad-sweeping rights to a common noun in the English language.
True. So if you find a field that Apple doesn't dabble in - and that's damned hard these days btw, otherwise I'd have made the very point in my first post - then you could do so. It would be tough to call anything computer related "Apple" because they're pretty ubiquitous. They make hardware, software, OS, etc.
But yes, you can name your company Apple (as Apple vacations has done) and not infringe.
On the contrary, I learned in school long about about trademark. I can no more create a computer company named AppleSoftware, which infringes on the trademark of Apple any more than Apple can create an OS named Tiger than infringes on the TigerSoftware name. They are in the same market. Now, if they were making something called the Tiger Lawn Mower (if something like that didn't already exist), that's a completely different story.
Glad you covered that in school but that's a bit of an oversimplified perspective. It's a balance between how similar the markets of the two products are, how generic the name is, and possibility of confusion. Here, "computers" in general isn't all that narrow, "Tiger" is a pretty common name, and there's almost no possibility for confusion as one is a computer reseller and the other is an operating system. So there's little case for infringement here. Hell, the Windows vs. Lindows case wasn't open/shut, and there it was two operating systems, a much closer match.
Maybe Tiger Direct isn't that naive, but is Apple really that naive as well to just go take names?
You can't own something as generic as "Tiger."
It is certainly fair play that Apple has to play by the rules. All that imagination for computer design, but they couldn't come up with a more original, and unused, name?
OK then kid, you find a name less than 15 letters that hasn't been used in some way - any way, according to your logic - with computers. See how ridiculous that gets? That's why trademark protection isn't as broad as you seem to think.
Guess what, Apple... somebody already thought of it
No they didn't. They have a computer sales business named Tiger. There's no OS tamed Tiger. 'Til tomorrow.
I think the most interesting thing about this is how similar the original page is to today's Google. Guess it goes to show they really hit on the right thing pretty early on as far as the site's interface goes.
What, the notion that people using a search engine want a big search bar in the middle of the screen and not a bunch of clutter?
Revolutionary idea, that. Sad thing is I'm not being sarcastic.
Libel applies whereever you attribute something in writing to someone who does not hold that belief. It is always legally actionable.
Check out the Flynt case, before the Supreme Court. Said libel also has to be *believable.* Hence, when Flynt published things about Falwell's mother's, ah, *taste*, it was found to be parody because no one in their right mind would believe it.
This is awesome, now not only are some of the grandest libraries in America being digitized, so too are some of the grandest in Europe. As great as Google is, I would very much prefer a world where all the eggs were not in one basket.
As long as the access remains open, sure, it's great. For once, nationalistic (or regionalistic) pride does something good.
If anything, it's sad that an American company has to scare them into doing something good rather than doing it on their own.
This story reminds me of this one time when this script kiddie asked me for my IP address and I told him 127.0.0.1! Oh wait, that's because it's the same fucking story! That's because everyone has seen this done or done it themselves once in their fucking life, and nobody fucking cares.
Sure, everybody has. But how many times has said kid actually gone through with it and nuked his damn box? Assuming story is true, of course.
Other problems with your post:
This kind of shit gets posted, when so many good articles get shitcanned? What the fuck barbeque?
If you expect good articles on slashdot, you're in the wrong damned place. This is where self-righteous losers come to discuss the latest Apple MHz bump, or how some administrative oversight is proof of America's descent into totalitarianism, or the latest shitty Star Trek/Wars/Buffy show. Oh, and trolls like me who like to screw with them.
So why the hell are you here? Nice post, by the way.
I use 768 with no problems, then again, its what you do with it.
Yeah, that's probably enough too. Mine isn't awful with 512 - it's OK for a laptop, but I'd expect more from an expensive desktop. I mean, if you're spending $1500 on a desktop these days, it better be damned good.
It's because everyone skimps on RAM. Dell, HP, Toshiba, Alienware, IBM
Outside of Alienware, those other manufacturers aren't selling "botique" computers at high margins and high prices. Alienware is, and their top-of-the line computers (anything over $2000) comes with 1GB standard. Their $1500 model does come with 512MB, and I think that's a mistake. Alienware's been selling out a bit lately.
God Damn! Last year they were saying 256mb wasn't enough and people complained
Yeah, and this is this year. Now that isn't good enough. Welcome to computers. I bet 5 years from now 1GB won't be enough either, huh?
For this specific example, 256MB running Mac OSX is damn near a joke. 512MB is fairly adequate - that's what I have, but I run a fair amount of stuff, and I get the beachball more often than I'd like. 1 GB is the "transparency point" for Mac OSX, so a good desktop priced over $1500 should come with that standard.
I've never understood why Apple skimps on RAM - I know the idea is to sell you an upgrade, but magazine articles usually compare machines "stock," and we don't want Mac OSX, a very nice operating system, to seem klunky because it doesn't have enough RAM do we?
Sure you can prove it. Watch the behind the scenes materials for AOTC. It's people saying yes to George, and no one challenges him on anything, no matter the poor logic or decisions made.
I meant that literally *I* couldn't prove it - I don't have any of the DVD's. But I suspected that someone who did - ie, you - easily could. So thanks.;)
Yes. Story, screenplay, director, producer, and owns the studio as well as the graphics house.
Look at some of the Pixar "behind the scenes" things. They review, review, review. All that dialogue and arguing helps make something better. They spend a ton of time getting even the story right first.
I don't think that happens at Lucasfilms. I have a feeling (can't prove it) that George surrounds himself with yes-bots. That's why it's hard to watch the new movies without mute on, the dialog is so bad. Graphics too - the old style with puppets and such doesn't look half as dated *now* as the CG effects from the first movie.
I disagree. I know the standard Slashdot claim is that Lucas is only in it for the money. Squeezing the last dollars out of your childhood memories, etc.
But I don't believe it.
You're right. He's in it for the ego gratification. That's why he's taken over more of the Star Wars duties (ie, screenplay, directing, and priducing) that he didn't do the first time around when he wrote the story and was executive producer. And since he can't write dialog or direct to save his life, we have one craptastic prequel trilogy.
Frankly, unless humanity decides to undergo a massive collective personality change of not being consumption-focused, I don't see much other way around these particular issues.
Thanks for today's communist editorial on Prav...er, I mean slashdot. Try to spend more time on NOT POSTING DUPES than on front-page editorializing. OK? Thanks.
If I were a customer, I'd insist that they ship me the supposedly legitimate one and pay for my return postage before they get the other one back, seeing as how it was their mistake, not mine, and that I should not be liable for their cockup. If they want it right, they have to do the work to make it right, not me. If they won't support the product then the credit card company gets called and the charge is revoked, as I as a consumer haven't been given what I've paid for.
I'd have to imagine Apple's arranging for pickups. Otherwise, I'd tell them they can take my word for it that I destroyed the disc. I don't think they have any legal recourse anyway (as you point out).
Although as a prior poster pointed out...EBAY! Though I bet that auction gets cancelled.
And individuals petitioning congress never have self-centered motivations and propose things beneficial to themselves but harmful to society overall? And none of these individuals have loads of money?
Yes, but this isn't something that affects MS's bottom line in any way. They can't claim publicity, because it's an issue that the pulic (for right or wrong) doesn't support. So it's not like a charity donation. And it certainly doesn't really amount to business.
As a publicly traded company, spending money on things that don't help or possibly harm the business can be construed a breach of fiduciary responsibility.
So to sum up, this is not something MS has any business doing. That's not to say Ballmer can't cash out some of his stock options and continue the fight. If this is an issue he supports, that's what he should do. But he shouldn't be using company cash to pursue his own agenda that doesn't have anything to do with the company.
I'm a fairly experienced coder, but I don't have any experience with AOP whatever. I don't even know what it is!
It's a buzzword intended to drive a lot of book sales and consultancy fees. Hell, throw that in your vocabulary along with "TCO", "ROI", "paradigm", etc, and ca$h in!
I am in a band, and I am also in charge of our website. When I wanted to publish a music video just two months ago, there was NOWHERE that would host it for me. I ended up having to apply for a membership to an independant film online community, and encode my video down to a teeny postage stamp sized thing. If I were doing it today, there are half a dozen site that would host it for free, in high quality DIVX glory.
Huh? WTF happened in the last two months? Is this 1998 again?
Slashdot Mirror
See, you'd think that with how the slashbots love to bash America and embrace anything that's "Not America," but find me a supposedly enlightened Euro nation that DOESN'T tax blank media. I know France, Britain, Germany, Italy, and Belgium all do, all the Scandinavian countries do, and it looks the Netherlands is about there. Not sure about Spain. Canada does as well, and I think might have been the first.
Not starting a flame war, just pointing out that it's easy to focus on the crappy things that happen anywhere...but I don't see a "media tax" happening in the US. People say the US is controlled by corporations - true to a large extent, but or RIAA isn't as influential, evidently, as their Euro counterparts. We prefer evidence of crime before punishment...at least for our citizens. ;P
That's kinda what I meant. But the tradeoff is that typically for trademark law, the more generic the name the narrower the focus you're granted. As such, you can't do anything with Microsoft, but you can't get broad-sweeping rights to a common noun in the English language.
True. So if you find a field that Apple doesn't dabble in - and that's damned hard these days btw, otherwise I'd have made the very point in my first post - then you could do so. It would be tough to call anything computer related "Apple" because they're pretty ubiquitous. They make hardware, software, OS, etc.
But yes, you can name your company Apple (as Apple vacations has done) and not infringe.
No, that's not an interesting bet. The interesting bet is how many times it gets posted, and I'm putting the line at two dupes.
Glad you covered that in school but that's a bit of an oversimplified perspective. It's a balance between how similar the markets of the two products are, how generic the name is, and possibility of confusion. Here, "computers" in general isn't all that narrow, "Tiger" is a pretty common name, and there's almost no possibility for confusion as one is a computer reseller and the other is an operating system. So there's little case for infringement here. Hell, the Windows vs. Lindows case wasn't open/shut, and there it was two operating systems, a much closer match.
Maybe Tiger Direct isn't that naive, but is Apple really that naive as well to just go take names?
You can't own something as generic as "Tiger."
It is certainly fair play that Apple has to play by the rules. All that imagination for computer design, but they couldn't come up with a more original, and unused, name?
OK then kid, you find a name less than 15 letters that hasn't been used in some way - any way, according to your logic - with computers. See how ridiculous that gets? That's why trademark protection isn't as broad as you seem to think.
Guess what, Apple... somebody already thought of it
No they didn't. They have a computer sales business named Tiger. There's no OS tamed Tiger. 'Til tomorrow.
What, the notion that people using a search engine want a big search bar in the middle of the screen and not a bunch of clutter?
Revolutionary idea, that. Sad thing is I'm not being sarcastic.
Libel applies whereever you attribute something in writing to someone who does not hold that belief. It is always legally actionable.
Check out the Flynt case, before the Supreme Court. Said libel also has to be *believable.* Hence, when Flynt published things about Falwell's mother's, ah, *taste*, it was found to be parody because no one in their right mind would believe it.
That's kinda what parody is.
What the hell does that mean? Are you taking me out? Will I be wearing concrete boots tomorrow?
Tool.
As long as the access remains open, sure, it's great. For once, nationalistic (or regionalistic) pride does something good.
If anything, it's sad that an American company has to scare them into doing something good rather than doing it on their own.
Heh. I'm the troll, not the self-righteous clown. Get yer stereotypes straight.
Sure, everybody has. But how many times has said kid actually gone through with it and nuked his damn box? Assuming story is true, of course.
Other problems with your post:
This kind of shit gets posted, when so many good articles get shitcanned? What the fuck barbeque?
If you expect good articles on slashdot, you're in the wrong damned place. This is where self-righteous losers come to discuss the latest Apple MHz bump, or how some administrative oversight is proof of America's descent into totalitarianism, or the latest shitty Star Trek/Wars/Buffy show. Oh, and trolls like me who like to screw with them.
So why the hell are you here? Nice post, by the way.
Yeah, that's probably enough too. Mine isn't awful with 512 - it's OK for a laptop, but I'd expect more from an expensive desktop. I mean, if you're spending $1500 on a desktop these days, it better be damned good.
Outside of Alienware, those other manufacturers aren't selling "botique" computers at high margins and high prices. Alienware is, and their top-of-the line computers (anything over $2000) comes with 1GB standard. Their $1500 model does come with 512MB, and I think that's a mistake. Alienware's been selling out a bit lately.
Yeah, and this is this year. Now that isn't good enough. Welcome to computers. I bet 5 years from now 1GB won't be enough either, huh?
For this specific example, 256MB running Mac OSX is damn near a joke. 512MB is fairly adequate - that's what I have, but I run a fair amount of stuff, and I get the beachball more often than I'd like. 1 GB is the "transparency point" for Mac OSX, so a good desktop priced over $1500 should come with that standard.
I've never understood why Apple skimps on RAM - I know the idea is to sell you an upgrade, but magazine articles usually compare machines "stock," and we don't want Mac OSX, a very nice operating system, to seem klunky because it doesn't have enough RAM do we?
I meant that literally *I* couldn't prove it - I don't have any of the DVD's. But I suspected that someone who did - ie, you - easily could. So thanks. ;)
Yes. Story, screenplay, director, producer, and owns the studio as well as the graphics house.
Look at some of the Pixar "behind the scenes" things. They review, review, review. All that dialogue and arguing helps make something better. They spend a ton of time getting even the story right first.
I don't think that happens at Lucasfilms. I have a feeling (can't prove it) that George surrounds himself with yes-bots. That's why it's hard to watch the new movies without mute on, the dialog is so bad. Graphics too - the old style with puppets and such doesn't look half as dated *now* as the CG effects from the first movie.
Bring Frank Oz back.
Hopefully he's off buggering timothy - maybe Hemos can make it a "stack formation."
You're right. He's in it for the ego gratification. That's why he's taken over more of the Star Wars duties (ie, screenplay, directing, and priducing) that he didn't do the first time around when he wrote the story and was executive producer. And since he can't write dialog or direct to save his life, we have one craptastic prequel trilogy.
Yay!
No. It's like cutting off someone else's nose to spite their face. ;)
Thanks for today's communist editorial on Prav...er, I mean slashdot. Try to spend more time on NOT POSTING DUPES than on front-page editorializing. OK? Thanks.
I'd have to imagine Apple's arranging for pickups. Otherwise, I'd tell them they can take my word for it that I destroyed the disc. I don't think they have any legal recourse anyway (as you point out).
Although as a prior poster pointed out...EBAY! Though I bet that auction gets cancelled.
Yes, but this isn't something that affects MS's bottom line in any way. They can't claim publicity, because it's an issue that the pulic (for right or wrong) doesn't support. So it's not like a charity donation. And it certainly doesn't really amount to business.
As a publicly traded company, spending money on things that don't help or possibly harm the business can be construed a breach of fiduciary responsibility.
So to sum up, this is not something MS has any business doing. That's not to say Ballmer can't cash out some of his stock options and continue the fight. If this is an issue he supports, that's what he should do. But he shouldn't be using company cash to pursue his own agenda that doesn't have anything to do with the company.
It's a buzzword intended to drive a lot of book sales and consultancy fees. Hell, throw that in your vocabulary along with "TCO", "ROI", "paradigm", etc, and ca$h in!
"Grammar Nazis are pigfuckers."
Huh? WTF happened in the last two months? Is this 1998 again?