I don't believe you need a license to sell the speakers. If you were to sell the modify the speakers and resell them under the Bose name, then Bose would take up issue with you.
Thats a slippery slope. The CD Recorder only copies the game. Nothing wrong with that. The mod chip actually allows it to be played. Thats where the legal issue starts.
Yes, but I am not talking about homebrew games. You can't say that all mod chips were created just so people could play homebrewed games. You can't appeal to just that one cause. Mod chips are bought for several reasons. Some of them good, some of them bad. You can't rule out the bad just because there is some good.
If the mod chips only let you play homebrew games it would be different. It wouldn't be breaking any laws because it wouldn't be affecting a corporations botton line.
Here is how it infringes on the licensing model that Sony (and many game developers) go by:
Company A is licensed to sell the game "Super Mega 1" in the UK.
Company B is licensed to sell the game "Super Mega 1" in the US.
Company C gives away illegal copies of the game to everyone.
Company A has an agreement with the developer of "Super Mega 1" to sell the game and take a 10% distribution fee. Company B's agreement entitles them to a 5% distribution fee. Since they are in different sized markets, it doesn't really matter. Company A should make just as much money because they are allowed a large cut of the profit. When you live in the UK and you purchase the game from Company B, it shouldn't work. Why? Because Sony wants to uphold the licensing model. Thats why they regionalize the PS2. By modding the PS2 you take away that regionalization, thereby allowing someone in the UK to purchase the game from Company B. There goes the profit that Company A was supposed to get.
I won't even get into Company C, because their shit is just fucked from the get go.
The modchip itself DOES NOT infringe the licenses that you have sold to others. It will just sit there sucking up power doing absolutely nothing.....
The mod chip allows the user to break the licensing model. REGARDLESS of it sucking up power.
Not once did I mention licensing mod chips. Where in god's name are you getting this from? Why would I license a mod chip that defeats the purpose of licensing in the first place?
You certainly can take a PS2, add a mod chip and sell it as the "PS2 Super 900" or whatever. I won't argue that. Sony will. And from the looks of it, if you are in the UK, Sony will win.
Oh, and the laws.. there are multiple laws for everything. Look at murder in the US. There are hundreds of different murder classifications just so they can prosecute someone to the fullest extent. Lawyers don't care about having to argue more and more in a case. Its what they are paid to do.
P.S. if you were licensed to sell the BOSE speakers you would make more money.
Huh? More laws = harder to enfore. You have more work to do to prove the defendant guilty.
Actually, the amount of work has nothing to do with it. You have twice as many possible charged to put against them, thereby making it an even greater possibility that they'll get to the courts.
Uhhh, yeah, we're not talking IP license breaking, we're talking misrepresentation. The former requires an agreement between two parties to mean anything, the latter requires that someone sells something that isn't what it is.
We are very clearly talking about license breaking. Software companies are licensed to distribute games in a particular region. By offering a region breaking chip you are allowing somoene else to profit when they aren't supposed to. Thats how licensing works.
Selling a Yugo with a Ford stick is COMPLETELY legal if you write on the ad "2004 YUGO WITH FORD STICKER!".
How true. My example involved replacing all badges on the Yugo with focus branding. The whole point of that is that the consumer is supposed to think he is getting a focus.
Then... why would you make a license with a modchip maker?
Clearly you didn't. So they never broke a license. Therefore, your beef isn't with the modchip maker.
Of course I didn't license them to sell their mod chips. Their mod chips infringe on the licenses that I already sold to others. Thats why I am sueing them!!! I can't make money if they circumnavigate my licensed sellers.
Why the hell do we need TWO laws to do the same thing? Because it's *FUN*?
Because it makes them easier to enforce. If I owned proprietary technology and licensed its use I would most certainly want to make sure that I made every penny I was supposed to. If I didn't want to make money, I wouldn't have licensed it.
They take away the licensing fees that they negotiated for that particular region, they also fuck with distribution rights for some games, and they also allow for pirated (and completely unpaid for) games to be played.
Would ford sue you for fucking with your focus? No.. but they would sue the pants off of you if you took a truck load 20 year old Yugos and put focus badges on them just to sell them to the masses. Essentially thats what this judgement defends against. Selling a product that cheats a license holder (or in my focus example a trademark holder) out of making a buck.
Apple is a marketing powerhouse. They would have no problem selling an operating system that is compatible with a PC. They could easily recoup R&D costs through licensing of their hardware architecture to third party vendors. If Dell or IBM sold a G5 compatible computer apple would easily benefit, and therefore gain a larger share of the PC market. They are making money by selling songs through the free iTMS on the windows platform. They increased the sales of iPods simply by making them easily compatible with windows pcs. In my opinion iTunes has nothing to do with the popularity of the iPod. The fact that its a great product makes it a strong seller.
Lets not assume it would be sold for $600 dollars first of all. And it certainly wouldn't be too hard for Apple to make software like iCal (or any other Apple only application) available to the windows/linux crowd.. hell, they did it with iTunes and they are certainly benefiting from that.
It is rather amusing that the iPod is the product that is keeping them afloat and flush with cash.
I think making the iPod compatable with PC's was a great idea, but it really doesn't help him with pushing his computers as the 'digital hub' that he wants them to be. Frankly, apple should stop producing non-pc compatable products. Offering their operating systems and applications on different platforms would certainly help with the 'digital hub' plans. I won't even get into allowing third party manufacturing of their computers. We should all realize that doing that would
we're not talking about tracking worms coming from an email. We're talking about tracking malware installed from visiting a website or a series of websites.
Tracing the ancestry of a bacterial strain that affected hundreds of people is relatively easy compared to tracking down the sites that affected millions. Disease outbreaks take hundreds of man-hours to actually track down, and frankly I don't think its possible to get to the root of a computer based problem that affects thousands (if not millions on a worldwide scale).
As time goes by (and more and more vulnerabilities come out) they are more and more likely to ditch the Windows name and go for something that sounds more secure. Longhorn itself gives the appearance that they are building something broad and bulky (and therefore hard to take down).
Think about it. You can lock a window, but some bastard kid can still through a baseball through it.
Applications should not be connected to the OS except in cases when its needed. If companies like Adobe, Oracle, IBM and Macromedia (to name a few) can build robust and useful applications without tying them into the OS then microsoft can do the same.
Microsoft, which has delayed Longhorn's rollout, has not said when it will be released as the successor to Windows XP, the current version of the personal-computer operating system. Several industry analysts have predicted introduction of Longhorn in 2006 or possibly 2007, which is when the antitrust settlement is scheduled to expire. - Washington Post
Since Longhorn will be distributed after the terms of the antitrust agreement expire they can do whatever the hell they want. They can show one thing when in reality they mean to implement another. I am not saying thats what they are going to do, its just a possibility.
I don't see how distributed bandwidth would help with what is essentially a small marked up text file.
If someone is serious about their RSS feed they can just dedicate a box for it.
Perhaps a better way to thing of the RSS feed would be to serve it up "buffet" style. All you can eat for a dollar.. or in this case.. all you can download for a set amount of time (cycles whatever)..
its a horrible idea.
I think they made the comic to insult her lack of knowledge of the spider-man characters.
Gabe has stated manytimesinthe past that he enjoy 's a good web-slinging from time to time. He was just insulted that she didn't know anything at all about the character (and characters) in the movie thats making her millions.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't believe you need a license to sell the speakers. If you were to sell the modify the speakers and resell them under the Bose name, then Bose would take up issue with you.
Thats a slippery slope. The CD Recorder only copies the game. Nothing wrong with that. The mod chip actually allows it to be played. Thats where the legal issue starts.
I am not talking about homebrew games. I am talking about licensed games.
Yes, but I am not talking about homebrew games. You can't say that all mod chips were created just so people could play homebrewed games. You can't appeal to just that one cause. Mod chips are bought for several reasons. Some of them good, some of them bad. You can't rule out the bad just because there is some good.
If the mod chips only let you play homebrew games it would be different. It wouldn't be breaking any laws because it wouldn't be affecting a corporations botton line.
- Company A is licensed to sell the game "Super Mega 1" in the UK.
- Company B is licensed to sell the game "Super Mega 1" in the US.
- Company C gives away illegal copies of the game to everyone.
Company A has an agreement with the developer of "Super Mega 1" to sell the game and take a 10% distribution fee. Company B's agreement entitles them to a 5% distribution fee. Since they are in different sized markets, it doesn't really matter. Company A should make just as much money because they are allowed a large cut of the profit. When you live in the UK and you purchase the game from Company B, it shouldn't work. Why? Because Sony wants to uphold the licensing model. Thats why they regionalize the PS2. By modding the PS2 you take away that regionalization, thereby allowing someone in the UK to purchase the game from Company B. There goes the profit that Company A was supposed to get.I won't even get into Company C, because their shit is just fucked from the get go.
The modchip itself DOES NOT infringe the licenses that you have sold to others. It will just sit there sucking up power doing absolutely nothing.....
The mod chip allows the user to break the licensing model. REGARDLESS of it sucking up power.
I wasn't going for the fraud aspect. I was working on the trademark/licensing angle. I even stated so within the analagy.
Not once did I mention licensing mod chips. Where in god's name are you getting this from? Why would I license a mod chip that defeats the purpose of licensing in the first place?
You certainly can take a PS2, add a mod chip and sell it as the "PS2 Super 900" or whatever. I won't argue that. Sony will. And from the looks of it, if you are in the UK, Sony will win.
Oh, and the laws.. there are multiple laws for everything. Look at murder in the US. There are hundreds of different murder classifications just so they can prosecute someone to the fullest extent. Lawyers don't care about having to argue more and more in a case. Its what they are paid to do.
P.S. if you were licensed to sell the BOSE speakers you would make more money.
Huh?
More laws = harder to enfore. You have more work to do to prove the defendant guilty.
Actually, the amount of work has nothing to do with it. You have twice as many possible charged to put against them, thereby making it an even greater possibility that they'll get to the courts.
Uhhh, yeah, we're not talking IP license breaking, we're talking misrepresentation. The former requires an agreement between two parties to mean anything, the latter requires that someone sells something that isn't what it is.
We are very clearly talking about license breaking. Software companies are licensed to distribute games in a particular region. By offering a region breaking chip you are allowing somoene else to profit when they aren't supposed to. Thats how licensing works. Selling a Yugo with a Ford stick is COMPLETELY legal if you write on the ad "2004 YUGO WITH FORD STICKER!".
How true. My example involved replacing all badges on the Yugo with focus branding. The whole point of that is that the consumer is supposed to think he is getting a focus.
Then... why would you make a license with a modchip maker?
Clearly you didn't. So they never broke a license. Therefore, your beef isn't with the modchip maker.
Of course I didn't license them to sell their mod chips. Their mod chips infringe on the licenses that I already sold to others. Thats why I am sueing them!!! I can't make money if they circumnavigate my licensed sellers.
Why the hell do we need TWO laws to do the same thing? Because it's *FUN*?
Because it makes them easier to enforce. If I owned proprietary technology and licensed its use I would most certainly want to make sure that I made every penny I was supposed to. If I didn't want to make money, I wouldn't have licensed it.
They take away the licensing fees that they negotiated for that particular region, they also fuck with distribution rights for some games, and they also allow for pirated (and completely unpaid for) games to be played.
Would ford sue you for fucking with your focus? No.. but they would sue the pants off of you if you took a truck load 20 year old Yugos and put focus badges on them just to sell them to the masses. Essentially thats what this judgement defends against. Selling a product that cheats a license holder (or in my focus example a trademark holder) out of making a buck.
Apple is a marketing powerhouse. They would have no problem selling an operating system that is compatible with a PC. They could easily recoup R&D costs through licensing of their hardware architecture to third party vendors. If Dell or IBM sold a G5 compatible computer apple would easily benefit, and therefore gain a larger share of the PC market.
They are making money by selling songs through the free iTMS on the windows platform. They increased the sales of iPods simply by making them easily compatible with windows pcs. In my opinion iTunes has nothing to do with the popularity of the iPod. The fact that its a great product makes it a strong seller.
Lets not assume it would be sold for $600 dollars first of all. And it certainly wouldn't be too hard for Apple to make software like iCal (or any other Apple only application) available to the windows/linux crowd.. hell, they did it with iTunes and they are certainly benefiting from that.
I think making the iPod compatable with PC's was a great idea, but it really doesn't help him with pushing his computers as the 'digital hub' that he wants them to be. Frankly, apple should stop producing non-pc compatable products. Offering their operating systems and applications on different platforms would certainly help with the 'digital hub' plans. I won't even get into allowing third party manufacturing of their computers. We should all realize that doing that would
- Drive down the price, and;
- increase their market penetration...
but no.. that will never happen.we're not talking about tracking worms coming from an email. We're talking about tracking malware installed from visiting a website or a series of websites.
Tracing the ancestry of a bacterial strain that affected hundreds of people is relatively easy compared to tracking down the sites that affected millions. Disease outbreaks take hundreds of man-hours to actually track down, and frankly I don't think its possible to get to the root of a computer based problem that affects thousands (if not millions on a worldwide scale).
Maybe someday.. just not now.
As time goes by (and more and more vulnerabilities come out) they are more and more likely to ditch the Windows name and go for something that sounds more secure. Longhorn itself gives the appearance that they are building something broad and bulky (and therefore hard to take down).
Think about it. You can lock a window, but some bastard kid can still through a baseball through it.
Applications should not be connected to the OS except in cases when its needed. If companies like Adobe, Oracle, IBM and Macromedia (to name a few) can build robust and useful applications without tying them into the OS then microsoft can do the same.
Microsoft, which has delayed Longhorn's rollout, has not said when it will be released as the successor to Windows XP, the current version of the personal-computer operating system. Several industry analysts have predicted introduction of Longhorn in 2006 or possibly 2007, which is when the antitrust settlement is scheduled to expire. - Washington Post Since Longhorn will be distributed after the terms of the antitrust agreement expire they can do whatever the hell they want. They can show one thing when in reality they mean to implement another. I am not saying thats what they are going to do, its just a possibility.
I believe that some of it is H20 and some of it is carbon dioxide. But my beliefs don't mean squat, so I offer this link instead.
I don't see how distributed bandwidth would help with what is essentially a small marked up text file. If someone is serious about their RSS feed they can just dedicate a box for it. Perhaps a better way to thing of the RSS feed would be to serve it up "buffet" style. All you can eat for a dollar.. or in this case.. all you can download for a set amount of time (cycles whatever).. its a horrible idea.
I don't think people would be as excited if they found trojans on uranus.
simply because there are giant chunks of ice that have been visible on its surface for as long as I have been alive. Where there's smoke...
I think they made the comic to insult her lack of knowledge of the spider-man characters.
Gabe has stated many times in the past that he enjoy 's a good web-slinging from time to time. He was just insulted that she didn't know anything at all about the character (and characters) in the movie thats making her millions.
I already get enough errors from my digital cable box. I don't need to see a BSOD on my television anytime soon.
I am sure that there are bigger and better things that are secrets right now. Ya know the best thing about a well kept secret. No one knows about it.