I was thinking the same thing. I have no doubt that a suit, or the threat of a suit, will come as a result of that site. Afterall, they are using Microsoft's trademarks to create a market share of their own in the same business sector.
I stopped reading after the second paragraph of the article:
You can't build chips for all the game consoles. That's not possible. They would all like a slightly different style from the others. Difference is important. The same chip company would have difficulty designing chips for the different styles. It's also so high stakes that you need to focus. No one has enough extraneous resources around to build chips for all the game consoles.
No. Your contract says that they can change their policies at any time
Can such clauses really hold up in court? I know they abound, but no regular business-to-business contract could or would ever allow such bull. Consumers aren't even given a choice about the contracts we are forced to sign. It's a "take it or leave it" thing that doesn't really exist in the business world. I just have a hard time believing that if a lawsuit was ever actually brought forth, the "we can change our policies at any time" clause in any contract wouldn't be the first thing to get thrown out.
Ah, yes. I understand the concern. I do think that somehow ISP's should be accountable for guarantee-ing a certain level of their advertised services (From comcast's website: "Actual speeds may vary and are not guaranteed"), but that could be constructed as a separate issue from this legislation.
I think Tom Giovanetti's reasoning is very justifiable. Often times as humans we are quick to criticize, and very hypocrytical. We should ask ourselves how often we complain about the government regulating this or that and trying to solve problems that don't exist, while at the same time cheer on legislation that would have demanded things such as net neutrality. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't valid reasons for either or both, but it's a rhetorical question that I think we should all be asking ourselves.
Anyway, this is one of the reasons why I'd love to see the government set up a site for everybody to go to, where they can see each of their legislator's votes on issues, as well as a quick comment on the reasoning for voting that way (or longer per the legislator's desire), and put this out there in a very accessible location, and make this a manditory part of the legislative process. The site could be organized in a way such that citizens could easily see the reasoning behind other legislator's votes as well, so that counterpoints are clear to citizens.
This would all help us be better informed and make good decisions, as well as help the government keep itself in check ("I voted no on this legislation because it contains 'xxxxx' add-on legislation that I don't agree with"). Debates would always be there and available to citizens in a way that they can do it at their convenience, and don't have to try and dig up all this information themselves. Essentially, this idea would function a similar purpose as that of a judicial decision opinion (clarifying the decision). We don't need big media to give us all our info anymore. We can get it right from the source. The internet is a very powerful thing. LEVERAGE IT!
Anyway, I know that rant was slightly off topic, but I felt it to be relevant since originally my opinion was leaning towards enacting net neutrality legislation, but I still had my doubts, and this reasoning has made me think that maybe it's just better to wait and see what happens before we get too hasty to legislate, though I still do think that publically funded infrastructure should still be publically owned and unhindered.
Actually, Nintendo has quite a history that doesn't just include gaming. They have been in business since 1889, and have even ventured into businesses such as playing cards, a love hotel, and a taxi company. While they are most known for their gaming business, Nintendo just does a good job making sure that they have a business.
The House is really on a roll today. Not only did they reject net neutrality proposals, but they also approved a digital licensing bill which was discussed on Slashdot before, that has fair-use implications for consumers.
It looks like consumers just can't win in these battles these days.
Think ringtones, wallpapers and games on cellphones, only more expensive.
This is exactly what I fear in regards to episodic content, and why I have been so adamantly against it since I first heard about it. Back when I got my first cell phone, it came with dozens of ring tones (including many recognizable songs), and 3 (full) games built right into it. Did I mention that I got the phone for free?
The last phone I purchased, for $400, came with almost no ring tones, and only DEMOS of a couple games, of which you could play a level or two on before the game prompted you to buy the full version.
Of course, I could go out and buy these ring tones for $2.99 a piece (what about iTunes and their $0.99 model for the whole song, and higher quality to begin with?). Or I could go buy the games such as pac-man that can be found just about anywhere for free, for $5-10 per game.
I'd love for somebody to step up to the plate and tell me that the game industry won't end up like this if episodic content starts to take off.
What the heck is with Slashdot and all the FUD today? Reports of implanting immigrants with RFID, fears of OSS being killed off because of liability for software bugs, and now alien life arriving to earth via a comet from some crazy scientist who refuses to think it could possibly be explained any more rationally? This article doesn't even give any details of proof whatsoever that this could even POSSIBLY be valid.
Jeezus... I'm just as tinfoil-hat wary as any other slashdot regular, but the reports this afternoon are getting kind of ridiculous.
Also, the british mentality values privacy of the individual over anything else.
Uhh... is this the same British mentality that allows their government to track their every destination on the roads, and store that data for years?
Is this the same British mentality that is allowing the EU to dictate that ISP's retain all traffic info on all of their users for a minimum of 5 years?
Is this the same British mentality that recently got an innocent man shot because they thought he might be a terrorist, because he was wearing a trench coat?
Is this the same British mentality that is allowing their government to develop ID cards that have all your fingerprint and facial recognition data on it for analysis by all of these closed circuit cameras you guys are putting up on every street corner?
They should formalize this practice and make a palindrome out of the resulting acronym. That way we can be distracted with how cool they are to think of such things instead of worrying about what they're actually doing.
NSA-ASN - NSA's Analysis of Social Networks.
*sigh* I'm very honestly starting to get a sick feeling in my stomach over the direction our (my) country is headed. And yet, I feel like there's nothing I can do about it. Vote? Yeah... right.
Well IANAL, but I'm sure there's shaky legal ground there, though online porn always had those "18+ agreement" type things, too. Either way, it's a "what if" scenario that doesn't exist yet as far as I know. I don't know that **AA's arguments would change though - you're still distributing their content with the legal authority to do so (only the legal owner of copyrighted content is allowed to decide who can and can't distribute their works). And that is what they sue for in the first place.
*sigh* For the bazillionth time. The MPAA doesn't bring lawsuits against users for DOWNLOADING. They bring lawsuits against people who UPLOAD. Parent argument has no merit!
It is because of all the extra taxes, and the fact that Europe purchases good with the tax already included in the price. Also, it costs more to ship to Europe than it does to the US.
Personally, I hope they take the pack-in route. Not only will it make their competitors look bad, but it might force them to cough up a pack-in themselves. Which given the costs associated with developing a game on their consoles, would further dig in their losses on each unit.
Nintendo has lots of options if they wanted to take a route like this. It has been speculated by many gaming editors that Wii: Sports as showcased at E3 would make a great candidate for an included title with the system, and would really accent the features of the Wii console.
Also, given the Virtual Console, they could also have options for including free downloads of past Nintendo games from the VC online service. There really wouldn't be any loss factor for Nintendo by allowing each console to freely download a couple of Nintendo's old first party games.
But imagine if the Wii release price was a bit of a loss leader, a $175 sort of thing
From a marketing perspective, the difference between $179 and $199 is negligible. There is no reason for Nintendo to take any loss if the difference is less than $25 like that and still under $200. However, if the hardware comes in at $225, they'd be wise to price it at $199 anyway, since their loss on the hardware wouldn't last long, and they'd easily make it up with the sale of 1 or 2 games, or an accessory or two.
In the event that leaked information causes such an uprise, the leaker would certainly have demanded anonymity before reporting the information. What do you recommend in such a situation?
Slashdot Mirror
Hahahahaha! Oh wow, that has to have been the funniest thing I have read in weeks.
I was thinking the same thing. I have no doubt that a suit, or the threat of a suit, will come as a result of that site. Afterall, they are using Microsoft's trademarks to create a market share of their own in the same business sector.
*nod* Yeah, that is correct.
Innocent until proven guilty only applies to criminal charges, not civil suits.
Tell that to IBM
Actually, according to his blog, it seems to imply that you are indeed wrong.
Can such clauses really hold up in court? I know they abound, but no regular business-to-business contract could or would ever allow such bull. Consumers aren't even given a choice about the contracts we are forced to sign. It's a "take it or leave it" thing that doesn't really exist in the business world. I just have a hard time believing that if a lawsuit was ever actually brought forth, the "we can change our policies at any time" clause in any contract wouldn't be the first thing to get thrown out.
Ah, yes. I understand the concern. I do think that somehow ISP's should be accountable for guarantee-ing a certain level of their advertised services (From comcast's website: "Actual speeds may vary and are not guaranteed"), but that could be constructed as a separate issue from this legislation.
I think Tom Giovanetti's reasoning is very justifiable. Often times as humans we are quick to criticize, and very hypocrytical. We should ask ourselves how often we complain about the government regulating this or that and trying to solve problems that don't exist, while at the same time cheer on legislation that would have demanded things such as net neutrality. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't valid reasons for either or both, but it's a rhetorical question that I think we should all be asking ourselves.
Anyway, this is one of the reasons why I'd love to see the government set up a site for everybody to go to, where they can see each of their legislator's votes on issues, as well as a quick comment on the reasoning for voting that way (or longer per the legislator's desire), and put this out there in a very accessible location, and make this a manditory part of the legislative process. The site could be organized in a way such that citizens could easily see the reasoning behind other legislator's votes as well, so that counterpoints are clear to citizens.
This would all help us be better informed and make good decisions, as well as help the government keep itself in check ("I voted no on this legislation because it contains 'xxxxx' add-on legislation that I don't agree with"). Debates would always be there and available to citizens in a way that they can do it at their convenience, and don't have to try and dig up all this information themselves. Essentially, this idea would function a similar purpose as that of a judicial decision opinion (clarifying the decision). We don't need big media to give us all our info anymore. We can get it right from the source. The internet is a very powerful thing. LEVERAGE IT!
Anyway, I know that rant was slightly off topic, but I felt it to be relevant since originally my opinion was leaning towards enacting net neutrality legislation, but I still had my doubts, and this reasoning has made me think that maybe it's just better to wait and see what happens before we get too hasty to legislate, though I still do think that publically funded infrastructure should still be publically owned and unhindered.
How about "Social Sabotage"?
Actually, Nintendo has quite a history that doesn't just include gaming. They have been in business since 1889, and have even ventured into businesses such as playing cards, a love hotel, and a taxi company. While they are most known for their gaming business, Nintendo just does a good job making sure that they have a business.
The House is really on a roll today. Not only did they reject net neutrality proposals, but they also approved a digital licensing bill which was discussed on Slashdot before, that has fair-use implications for consumers.
It looks like consumers just can't win in these battles these days.
This is exactly what I fear in regards to episodic content, and why I have been so adamantly against it since I first heard about it. Back when I got my first cell phone, it came with dozens of ring tones (including many recognizable songs), and 3 (full) games built right into it. Did I mention that I got the phone for free?
The last phone I purchased, for $400, came with almost no ring tones, and only DEMOS of a couple games, of which you could play a level or two on before the game prompted you to buy the full version.
Of course, I could go out and buy these ring tones for $2.99 a piece (what about iTunes and their $0.99 model for the whole song, and higher quality to begin with?). Or I could go buy the games such as pac-man that can be found just about anywhere for free, for $5-10 per game.
I'd love for somebody to step up to the plate and tell me that the game industry won't end up like this if episodic content starts to take off.
What the heck is with Slashdot and all the FUD today? Reports of implanting immigrants with RFID, fears of OSS being killed off because of liability for software bugs, and now alien life arriving to earth via a comet from some crazy scientist who refuses to think it could possibly be explained any more rationally? This article doesn't even give any details of proof whatsoever that this could even POSSIBLY be valid.
Jeezus... I'm just as tinfoil-hat wary as any other slashdot regular, but the reports this afternoon are getting kind of ridiculous.
Uhh... is this the same British mentality that allows their government to track their every destination on the roads, and store that data for years?
Is this the same British mentality that is allowing the EU to dictate that ISP's retain all traffic info on all of their users for a minimum of 5 years?
Is this the same British mentality that recently got an innocent man shot because they thought he might be a terrorist, because he was wearing a trench coat?
Is this the same British mentality that is allowing their government to develop ID cards that have all your fingerprint and facial recognition data on it for analysis by all of these closed circuit cameras you guys are putting up on every street corner?
Huh... I must have missed something.
They should formalize this practice and make a palindrome out of the resulting acronym. That way we can be distracted with how cool they are to think of such things instead of worrying about what they're actually doing.
NSA-ASN - NSA's Analysis of Social Networks.
*sigh* I'm very honestly starting to get a sick feeling in my stomach over the direction our (my) country is headed. And yet, I feel like there's nothing I can do about it. Vote? Yeah... right.
Ah, yes. Like "Windows"?
Well IANAL, but I'm sure there's shaky legal ground there, though online porn always had those "18+ agreement" type things, too. Either way, it's a "what if" scenario that doesn't exist yet as far as I know. I don't know that **AA's arguments would change though - you're still distributing their content with the legal authority to do so (only the legal owner of copyrighted content is allowed to decide who can and can't distribute their works). And that is what they sue for in the first place.
*sigh* For the bazillionth time. The MPAA doesn't bring lawsuits against users for DOWNLOADING. They bring lawsuits against people who UPLOAD. Parent argument has no merit!
If you are implying that somebody should end up in jail, it wouldn't happen anyway. This is a civil suit. There are no criminal charges.
It is because of all the extra taxes, and the fact that Europe purchases good with the tax already included in the price. Also, it costs more to ship to Europe than it does to the US.
Nintendo has lots of options if they wanted to take a route like this. It has been speculated by many gaming editors that Wii: Sports as showcased at E3 would make a great candidate for an included title with the system, and would really accent the features of the Wii console.
Also, given the Virtual Console, they could also have options for including free downloads of past Nintendo games from the VC online service. There really wouldn't be any loss factor for Nintendo by allowing each console to freely download a couple of Nintendo's old first party games.
From a marketing perspective, the difference between $179 and $199 is negligible. There is no reason for Nintendo to take any loss if the difference is less than $25 like that and still under $200. However, if the hardware comes in at $225, they'd be wise to price it at $199 anyway, since their loss on the hardware wouldn't last long, and they'd easily make it up with the sale of 1 or 2 games, or an accessory or two.
In the event that leaked information causes such an uprise, the leaker would certainly have demanded anonymity before reporting the information. What do you recommend in such a situation?